However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The Defendant, together with C, D, E, and F (hereinafter referred to as “C, etc.”), taken marijuana over 10 times from January 1, 2017 by around 15:00 on December 5, 2016, including the taking of a portrait of Seongdong-gu Seoul building, a 106 dong and 1703 at the same time, containing marijuana ingredients in the manner of drinking.

Accordingly, the defendant taken marijuana in collusion with C, etc.

2. The Defendant, around the first and first night of August 2017, at a night, smoked in a way of cutting the smoke generated by inserting the mariage (i.e., one minute, approximately 0.5g) into the pipe in front of the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government H apartment 104, and attaching the fire to the pipe.

3. On August 201, 2017, the Defendant smoked in the same manner as, and in the same place as, the above-mentioned 2, at around 05:00, the marith of hemp (ordinary one minute, approximately 0.5g).

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of each police officer in relation to D, C, E, or F;

1. An investigation report (related to A currency details);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of each letter of narcotic appraisal;

1. Article 61 (1) 4 (a) and Article 3 subparagraph 10 (a) (Article 30 of the Criminal Act as stated in paragraph (1) of the same Article) of the Act on the Management of Narcotics, etc. for which the relevant provision of the Act and Article 61 (1) 4 (a) of the Act on the Management of

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. An order to observe the protection under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. The fact that there are significant personal and social harm of narcotics for the reason of sentencing in the proviso of Article 67 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc., and that there are many times of smoking or taking marijuana, etc. is an element of sentencing unfavorable to the defendant. On the other hand, the defendant recognizes and reflects the crime, and the fact that the defendant does not have the same power and has no other penalty power except for a single-time fine, etc. are favorable to the defendant.

In addition, the age, sex, environment, and background and result of the instant crime, after the crime is committed.