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.

On June 16, 2015, at around 13:00, the Defendant injected an industrial strong contact Ed, a D Co., Ltd. product containing hallucinogenic ingredients, into a test vinyl, in front of the 7th floor of Seo-gu Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon, Dalet, 3:00, and then inhaled them at the entrance of the above sealed paper in a way of hanging the nose.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of the witnessO and F;

1. A protocol of seizure and a list of seizure;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserts that the request for appraisal and the response to the appraisal (the defendant and his defense counsel did not have inhaled the main body as stated in the facts constituting a crime in their judgment, and that the vinyl paper containing the main body is too unusual to confirm the contents thereof;

However, according to each evidence duly adopted and investigated by this Court, the following circumstances are acknowledged.

Witness

A. From the investigative agency to this court, the Defendant et al. was at the time at the time, through windows in the neighboring building, and the Defendant et al. was found to have been at the test plastic sealing, and the scams were observed, and the police reported to the police as being suspected of inhaleing the scams, and reported to the police, that the situation was observed until the police was called out, and there are no circumstances to suspect the credibility of the statement.

In addition, the police officer F, who was called upon the above report, was carrying the Defendant’s hand with a black plastic paper, was carrying the Defendant’s hand, and it was found in the confirmation, but the Defendant’s entrance was weak, but the Defendant’s smell was accurately smelled.

was stated.

On the other hand, in light of the testimony of the witness and F, the relationship between the defendant and the witness G, etc., a witness G’s statement to the effect that the defendant discovered the fat containing the fat and confirmed its contents, and that the fat containing the fat does not have any fat in the face of the fat containing the dat is difficult to believe.

Comprehensively taking account of the above circumstances, the Defendant’s statement as indicated in the facts charged.