A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1,00,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

Of the facts charged in the instant case.

Punishment of the crime

Notwithstanding that the Defendant is not a person handling narcotics, the same year at around April 4, 2013.

4. Around October, 100, in the trade name in the new forest dong in Seoul Special Metropolitan City and in the officetel of H, the Defendant’s post-abriculon in G, the psychotropic drugs-related psychotropic drugs-related Meculon was administered in an irregular manner.

Summary of Evidence

1. Second prosecutor's protocol of examination of the accused;

1. Police seizure records;

1. Request for appraisal, report on narcotics appraisal (2);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (Evidence records 289 pages);

1. Article 60 (1) 2, Article 4 (1) 1, and subparagraph 3 (b) (Article 2 subparagraph 3 (b) (Article 60 (1) 2, Article 4 (1) 1, and Article 2 of the Act on the Selection and Management of Narcotics, Etc. and Selection of Imprisonment

1. Judgment on the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under the proviso of Article 67 of the Act on the Management of Narcotics, Etc.

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserts that criminal facts in the judgment are not specified in the facts charged, and the prosecution against the facts charged in the judgment should be dismissed.

The facts charged should be stated clearly by specifying the time and date, place, and method of a crime. The facts charged are sufficient if the facts constituting the crime are stated to the extent that they can be identified from other facts by integrating these elements, and even if the date, time, place, method, etc. of the crime are not specified in the indictment, it does not go against the purport of the law allowing the specification of the facts charged, and if general indication is inevitable in light of the nature of the crime charged, and it does not interfere with the defendant's exercise of his/her right to defense, the contents of the prosecution cannot be deemed

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Do2694 Decided June 14, 2007, and Supreme Court Decision 2008Do4854 Decided July 24, 2008, etc.). The time when the crime was administered in the judgment is the date when the psychotropic substance was recovered from the training reaction of the Mesamine, and the time when the crime was administered after the Mesamine’s medication.