마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)등
All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.
The defendant is a crime of No. 1-A, b, c, and 3-A of the judgment of the first instance.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In the judgment of the first instance court, the first instance court sentenced the punishment by separating the crimes of No. 1-A, C, and No. 3-A as indicated in the judgment, and the remaining crimes of No. 1 and No. 3 as indicated in the judgment of the second instance, and sentenced the punishment by separating the crimes of No. 1 and No. 2 as indicated in the judgment of the
Even if a separate sentence is imposed, Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act should be applied by analogy, and the defendant's punishment should be mitigated or exempted.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the first instance court: the first instance court’s sentence; the second instance court’s sentence; the second instance court’s imprisonment with prison labor for two years and six months; and the second instance court’s imprisonment for each of the remaining crimes as indicated in the judgment; the second instance court’s imprisonment with prison labor for two years and six months; and the third offense as indicated in the judgment) is too unreasonable.
2. In light of the language, legislative intent, etc. of the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act regarding the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, if a crime for which judgment has not yet been rendered could not be judged concurrently with the crime for which judgment has already become final and conclusive, the concurrent crime relationship under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act cannot be established, and it is reasonable to interpret that the sentence may not be imposed or the sentence may not be mitigated or exempted in consideration of equity
On the other hand, Article 38 of the Criminal Act is not applicable to several crimes which have not yet been adjudicated before and after the final judgment became final and conclusive, since there is no final and conclusive judgment on the grounds that the crimes committed before and after the final and conclusive judgment cannot be judged concurrently with the crimes for which the final and conclusive judgment became final and conclusive, among several crimes, the relation of concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act is recognized and Article 38 of the Criminal Act is not applicable.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2011Do2351, Jun. 10, 201; 2014Do469, Mar. 27, 2014). The following facts are recognized according to the records.