At around 06:00 on March 31, 2012, the Defendant, along with E, administered psychotropic drugs by inserting the volume of a single-time medication into a single-use injection machine and dilution into his own arms in Yeonsu-gu Incheon, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon, for injection.

B. At around 10:00 on the same day, the Defendant administered one-time medication with E, together with E, at the same place.

2. In a criminal trial, the burden of proof for the facts constituting an offense prosecuted is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction of guilt is to be based on evidence with probative value sufficient to have a judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, even if there is a suspicion of guilt against the defendant, it is inevitable to determine it with the benefit of the defendant.

As evidence consistent with the above facts charged, there is first a statement in E's investigative agency, but there is no consistency in the situation at the time of the crime and the statement about the progress before and after the crime, and in this court, the statement in E's investigative agency is false. In light of this point, the statement in E's investigative agency cannot be trusted.

Next, although the defendant's physical appearance appraisal results showed a philophone training reaction, it is not enough to recognize the guilty of the above charges only with such appraisal results.

Therefore, the above facts charged constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, the court acquitted the defendant pursuant to the latter part of Article 325