A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

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.

Punishment of the crime

1. On November 23, 2015, the Defendant smoked in the Defendant’s house located in Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, by inserting in one cigarette leaves in his possession.

2. On November 23, 2015, the Defendant smoked at the Defendant’s house located in Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, by inserting in one cigarette leaves in his possession.

Accordingly, the Defendant smoked marijuana twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

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

1. A written appraisal of fluoral narcotics and a written appraisal of deadly narcotic drugs;

1. Collection: A report on investigation (calculated amount for collection), and application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing the monthly trend of narcotics;

1. Article 61 (1) 4 (a) and subparagraph 10 (a) of Article 3 of the Act on the Management of Narcotics, Etc. for the Prevention of Criminal Facts and the Selection of Punishment therefor (Selection of Imprisonment);

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Orders to observe protection and attend lectures under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. Grounds for sentencing under the proviso to Article 67 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. for Additional Collection;

1. Scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines [the scope of the recommended punishment] [the scope of the punishment] from August to June of one year and six months, including the administration, simple possession, etc. of narcotics;

2. The Defendant’s decision-making of sentence is an element for sentencing that is disadvantageous to the Defendant, in consideration of the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of the past having been punished twice for the same kind of crime, and the importance of harm that narcotics have on society, and the necessity of eradicating narcotics crimes, etc.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant seems to have repented in depth and reflects the defendant's mistake, that the frequency of the crime of this case has not been more than twice, and that the previous defendant's past record of the crime of marijuana has been about 18 years and about 8 years, and it is difficult to view that there exists continuity between the previous criminal record and each of the crimes of this case, etc. are favorable to the defendant.