마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)등
1. The part concerning Defendant B in the judgment of the first instance and the judgment of the second instance shall be reversed, respectively.
Defendant
B Imprisonment with prison labor for one year.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant B’s punishment (the first instance court’s punishment: imprisonment of 1 year and 6 months, confiscation, additional collection of 216,60 won) and the second instance judgment: imprisonment of 2 months) is too unreasonable. (b) Defendant A’s punishment (the imprisonment of 3 years, confiscation, and additional collection of 1.4 million won) of the lower court is too unreasonable. (c) Defendant A’s punishment of 2 of the lower court (the imprisonment of 3 years, confiscation, and additional collection of 1.4 million won) was too unreasonable. Defendant A, who had the record of criminal punishment, such as the violation of the Act on the Control, etc. of Narcotics, etc. (the crime of violation of the Act on the Control, etc. of Narcotics, etc.) committed each of the instant offenses while the trial was in progress, and Defendant B also committed each of the instant offenses in violation of the Act on the Control, etc. of Narcotics, etc. (the instant case committed each of the instant offenses, even though the trial was in progress, and the risk of recidivism is very high.
2. Determination
A. Of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance on the part concerning Defendant B, the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance rendered each of the judgment, and the defendant and the prosecutor filed an appeal on this issue, and the court of second instance rendered a decision to jointly examine the above two appeals cases. Among the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance, each of the crimes against Defendant B in relation to the concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act should be sentenced to a single punishment pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the part concerning Defendant B
B. We examine the judgment on the argument of unfair sentencing against the above defendant A and the prosecutor, and the second court, based on its reasoning, determined the above punishment against the defendant. The defendant is the reason for sentencing favorable to the trial, including the result of the inquiry reply to the Commissioner of the Gyeong-do Police Agency for the fact-finding.