logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2018.02.01 2017노3613
마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing of each of the sentencing) by the court below (a punishment of 1 year and 2 months of imprisonment, additional collection of 500,000 won, Defendant B: imprisonment of 1 year and 2 months, and additional collection of 150,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. It is recognized that Defendant A recognized and reflected the instant crime, actively cooperated in narcotics investigation, and that there is a family member to support the Defendant.

However, the crime of this case is deemed to have purchased, delivered, and administered phiphones even though the defendant is not a narcotics handler. In light of the addiction to narcotics and the harm caused by the medication of narcotics, it is necessary to strictly punish and eradicate the crimes of this case. The defendant distributed phiphones to other persons by delivering phiphones in his possession, and the defendant has been punished twice as a narcotics crime. In particular, the defendant was sentenced to one year and two months as a result of the crime of phiphone medication on October 14, 2015 and was sentenced to one year and two months as of July 3, 2016, and the execution of the punishment of this case was completed on July 3, 2016, the possibility of repeating the crime of this case is also high, and the defendant's age, sex, motive, means and result of the crime of this case, and the records and changes in the circumstances after the crime of this case cannot be considered to be too unfair.

B. It is recognized that Defendant B recognized the crime of this case and reflected against the Defendant, and there is an old position to support the Defendant.

However, in light of the addiction of narcotics and the harm caused by the administration of narcotics, etc., the crime of this case is deemed to have purchased and administered phiphonephones even though the defendant is not a narcotics handler, and there is a need to strictly punish and eradicate the narcotics offender, and the defendant has been punished seven times as imprisonment with prison labor and by a fine.

arrow