마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
All appeals filed by the Defendants and by the Prosecutor against Defendant A are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (unfair sentencing) on Defendant A (one year and two months) is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant B (Cheating in Sentencing)’s punishment sentenced by the court below is too unreasonable for Defendant B’s crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. at the one-years Nos. 1 through 8 of the one-years table 2 of the crime committed in the judgment below, and two months of imprisonment for each violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. at the one-years Nos. 9 through 11 of the one-years table 2 of the crime committed in the judgment below].
(c)
According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor (as to Defendant A), although it can be recognized that Defendant A received phiphones from the co-defendant C on February 26, 2015, the lower court which acquitted Defendant A of this, has erred by misapprehending the fact and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The lower court rendered a judgment on the Prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts against Defendant A, on February 26, 2015, acquitted Defendant A on the ground that the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize this part of the facts charged, and that there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.
In comparison with the evidence records, a thorough examination of the judgment of the court below is conducted, and the defendant A's statement is not only the date and time of receiving the penphone, but also the shape of the penphone received, the judgment of the court below on this part of the facts charged is just and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts.
Therefore, the prosecutor's assertion of mistake about the defendant A is without merit.
B. The judgment of Defendant A on the wrongful assertion of sentencing by both parties to Defendant A committed the instant crime again during the period of repeated crime due to the same crime, 10 times the sentence for the same crime, 10 times the suspended sentence, 1 times the criminal punishment for the same crime, 20 times the suspended sentence, and 3 times the phonephones have been administered.