Defendant: approximately 4.96g of philophones (Evidence 1), approximately 0.90g of philophones (Evidence 1), which have been seized for a period of two and a half years of imprisonment;

Punishment of the crime

On September 14, 2017, at around 23:00, the Defendant purchased approximately 9.28gg of 2,000 grams from the person in an influenched from his name and influenite to six plastic bags (one philopon; hereinafter referred to as “philopon”) in a 2,000 square column (one 345,000 won in Korean), on credit from the third floor public toilets of Sinnam-si, China on September 15, 2017. At around 09:30 on September 15, 2017, the Defendant: (a) stored the roopon in its own food after packaging the roopon from the third floor of Sinnam-si, China into a roop and rap; (b) concealed it again into the roopon; and (c) began on September 15, 2017 to the Incheon Airport at around 10:50 on September 15, 2017.

Accordingly, even though the Defendant is not a narcotics handler, the Defendant imported approximately 9.28 grams of philophones, a local mental medicine, from China to Korea.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Seizure records;

1. A report on detection of the Incheon Customs Office and a photograph;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report on investigation (verification of the process of detecting phiphonephones);

1. Article 58(1)6, Article 4(1)1, Article 2 subparag. 3(b) of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. subject to the pertinent Act and the Selection of Punishment Act concerning criminal facts, and Articles 53 and 55(1)3 (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2009Da14448, Apr. 1, 201) of the Act on the Control of Confiscated Narcotics, Etc. (see, 2009Da1448, Apr. 2, 2009). However, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone alone that the above articles were or were to be provided for the crime of this case cannot be deemed as having been subject to forfeiture of the articles in question.