logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2013.07.19 2013노728
마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The misapprehension of the legal principle (section 1) provides philophones and the buyer pays the price. Thus, if one of the parties executes the transaction, it should be deemed that the commencement of the transaction is reached.

In this case, the Defendant received KRW 80,000 from C for the purchase price of phiphones, and thus, it should be deemed that the Defendant started to conduct the trade of phiphones.

B. In light of the fact-finding (Chapter 2), even if the seller possessed or obtained the philophone at the time of receiving money, or it is possible to do so, it appears that the commencement of the sale of philophones led to the commencement of the sale of philophones. However, at the time when the Defendant received the purchase price of philophones from C, the Defendant secured the way to obtain philophones, and was closely and closely adhered to the act of philophones, and thus, the Defendant came to have started to conduct the sale of

C. Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the ground that the Defendant did not enter into the commencement of the sale of phiphones, and thus, erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or by misapprehending the fact and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Judgment of the court below

A. Even if the Defendant received the payment of the price from the person who intends to purchase the philopon as to the 1 week upon the request to seek the philopon, at the time, the Defendant possessed or obtained the philopon.

Unless it is recognized that the defendant received the price under close close close to the possible trading act, such act can be seen as a preliminary act for the sale, and it cannot be said that the defendant's commencement of the execution of the act of trading philophones.

Since the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2008Do2392 Decided May 29, 2008, etc.). B.

The judgment on the second proposal shall be made.

arrow