A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, each of the facts charged shall be acquitted.

The scope of a trial cannot reverse the recognition of a crime as to the part of a crime without any ground for retrial in the retrial procedure. However, in a final and conclusive judgment that recognized several concurrent crimes as guilty, where it is recognized that there exist grounds for a request for retrial only for some of the facts constituting an offense among them, the judgment in the form of a single sentence should be decided. However, in light of the nature of the retrial system, the effect of a decision on commencing a retrial is limited to the facts constituting an offense without any ground for retrial in the form of a formal judgment, and thus, the new trial court cannot reverse the recognition of conviction through a new trial. However, since the new sentence should be imposed on that part, the new trial court should only deliberate only to the extent necessary for sentencing (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Do477, Jun. 14, 1996). As such, the judgment should be limited to the necessary scope for sentencing with respect to crimes other than marriage ice among the judgment subject to retrial.

Criminal facts

At around 01:00 on March 17, 1967, the Defendant, without any intent and ability to repay at the victim C's house located in Daegu Dong-gu, Daegu-gu, the Defendant, without having the intent and ability to repay, had the female purchase the drugs with D, and the Defendant, “30,000 won borrowed 30,000 won as he borrowed 30,000 won due to the shortage of 30,000 won,” and the Defendant also received 30,000 won from the victim, i.e., he got the victim to purchase the drugs.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of a certified copy of the Daegu District Court Decision 67Da4940 delivered on December 15, 1967

1. Criminal facts;