A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

20,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is not a person handling narcotics.

1. Around 01:00 on June 13, 2010, the Defendant administered philophones by taking approximately 0.03 grams of psychotropic drugs, which were psychotropic drugs in Category D for a single-use injection device (hereinafter “cloilphones”), using a psychotropic drug, which was psychotropic drugs in Category D, into which the Defendant 0.03gs of crophones were dyphosomes as soon as possible, and then injecting them into one’s own arms.

2. On August 2, 2010, the Defendant administered philophones by taking out approximately 0.03g of philophones contained in D for a single-use injection device, melting melting in his arms, after being exposed to the foregoing injection device.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness F and D;

1. A copy of the sixth protocol of examination of suspect concerning F by the prosecution;

1. A copy of each protocol of examination of suspect regarding D by the prosecution;

1. A copy of the second protocol of examination of suspect concerning G to the prosecution;

1. Statement by each prosecutor's office with respect to F and G (a copy);

1. Each prosecutor's protocol of statement concerning D (a copy);

1. The defendant asserts that the investigation report (the confirmation of the date of crime through the details of currency), investigation report (additional attachment of monetary details), investigation report (report on the market price of penphones), the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion and judgment as to this issue in paragraph (1) at the time were found D, but they did not have a phiphone, and therefore, they did not administer phiphones. As to the issue of paragraph (2) at the E beach, they did not have a phiphones, but did not have a phiphones administered.

According to the above evidence, F and D stated in this Court that they correspond to the facts charged in this case, and each of the above statements is somewhat inconsistent with the detailed contents. However, F and D are involved in many cases related to philophones except in this case, as well as to some extent from the time of the occurrence of this case.