logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.11.25 2016노1656
마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
Text

All appeals by the prosecutor and the defendant are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The court below erred by misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles on the part of acquittal (i.e., prosecutor) or not guilty.

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below on unreasonable sentencing (ten months of imprisonment, additional collection three hundred thousand won) is too uneased and unfair.

B. The guilty part of the lower court is erroneous in matters of mistake of facts.

2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court’s judgment convicting the Defendant of this part of the charges is justifiable, and the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.

F has consistently made a statement from the investigation stage to the lower court’s trial on May 29, 2015, regarding the fact that the Defendant purchased phiphones from the E around May 29, 2015. In light of the various circumstances of the lower court’s detailed statement on the grounds of the conviction, the F’s statement on this part is sufficiently reliable.

B. In particular, in order to support the credibility of the statement, F stated in detail the Defendant’s previous drug record in the past, the name of the person who was aware of the Defendant’s actual supply of the penphone sold by the Defendant to F, and the type and vehicle number (verification, back number N) that the O used to commit the crime at the time of the purchase and sale of the penphone. In fact, the Defendant was convicted of the Defendant on June 20, 1995 due to criminal facts, such as purchase, sale and administration of the penphone from the Seoul District Court (95Da12474) to the Defendant, and the name of “O”, while the Defendant was tried together with the Defendant, at the time of the trial, in P where the Defendant was mainly located near the place of the crime under this part of the facts charged.

arrow