logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.04.13 2017노33
마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (one year and ten months) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment below should take into account the following circumstances: (a) the period for which the Defendant handled narcotics is long; (b) the number of times the Defendant handled narcotics is not much; (c) the fact that the Defendant solicited another person to administer the chophone medication or delivered chophones to another person; and (d) the fact that each of the instant crimes was committed again despite the fact that the Defendant had been punished four times for the crimes related to narcotics, etc.; (b) however, in consideration of the Defendant’s health condition and family relationship, the Defendant sentenced the Defendant to imprisonment with labor for

In addition to the circumstances acknowledged by the lower court, the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is determined within the reasonable scope of discretion, comprehensively taking account of the following: (a) there is no change in the conditions of sentencing in the trial; and (b) other circumstances constituting the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case.

① The Defendant asserts to the effect that the sentencing may be considered on the grounds that he was able to do so with regard to Paragraph 1-C of the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below. However, according to the records of this case, the Defendant appears to have stated the above facts constituting the crime in the process of being urged by an investigative agency (see, e.g., evidence record No. 291), and it is difficult to view that the Defendant voluntarily surrendered the above facts constituting the crime.

② Also, the Defendant alleged to the effect that he/she has contributed to the cooperation with the narcotics investigation, and thus, the Defendant’s extradition investigation exceeds the fact that: (a) the Defendant requested on April 12, 2017 by the N of the Police Station N of the Gyeonggi-do Police Station during the game to inform him/her of a drug offender at the police station during the game cultivation by requesting the O and one other for his/her official investigation; and (b) arrested a drug offender on February 28, 2017.”

arrow