However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date of the final judgment.

The defendant is not a person handling narcotics.

On June 20, 2013, the Defendant: (a) placed approximately 0.03g of psychotropic drugs delivered from D at the dwelling of the Defendant (C building 105) in a single-use injection machine; (b) injected the psychotropic drugs into a single-use injection machine; and (c) injected them into the left-use serum.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the results of appraisal of narcotics;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (survey of the current market price of Metep cancer and calculation of additional collection charges);

1. Article 60 (1) 2, Article 4 (1), and subparagraph 3 (b) of Article 2 of the Act on the Selection and Management of Narcotics, Etc. concerning criminal facts, and the choice of imprisonment with labor;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Article 62 (1) of the suspended sentence (Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Article 62 (1) has no power to commit any crime after being sentenced to the suspended sentence for committing the same kind of crime in 2005). The crime of this case was limited to a single-time medication only on the penphones, and even if based on the actual outcome of each defense and maternity appraisal, it does not seem to have been administered habitually, and considering all the circumstances, such as the fact that his mistake

1. Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on Probation and Order to Attend Courses;

1. It shall be decided as per Disposition on the grounds beyond the proviso of Article 67 of the Act on the Management of Narcotics, Etc.;