A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

A penalty of KRW 100,000 shall be collected from a defendant.

The amount equivalent to the above surcharge.

Punishment of the crime

On October 7, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Narcotics Control Act at the Busan District Court on April 22, 2015, and completed the execution of the sentence at the Port Correctional Institution.

around 12:30 on May 31, 2015, the Defendant: (a) considered that the Defendant reported the crophone medication on the roads adjacent to the Busan-gu Busan-gu Busan-si C'D'; (b) the victim E (41 tax) who was aware of the crophone medication in the Donge-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong (hereinafter referred to as the “41”) reported the crophone medication; (c) considered the victim’s humping; and (d) went beyond the floor by drinking the victim’s face at several times, such as the victim’s face and face; and (d) caused the victim’s injury

The defendant of "2015 Highest 5830" is not a person handling narcotics.

On September 6, 2015, the Defendant, at around 05:00, injected a phiphone with approximately 0.05 g of Melopical medicine (one philopopon; hereinafter “philopon”) at the Defendant’s home located in Busan Jin-gu, Busan, by dilutioning approximately 0.05 g of Melopon with water at the Defendant’s home room, and administered a philopon with the Defendant’s arms in a way of injection with the Defendant’s Melopical medicine using a disposable injection device.

Summary of Evidence

"2015 Highest 3801"

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Investigation report- photograph (the defendant asserts that only fighting with the victim is only fighting and that there is no assault against the victim by drinking and shot to the extent that the victim suffers an injury.

However, E cannot make a statement on the trial date due to unknown whereabouts, so E’s statement on the background of the accident in the police station is considerably specific, and immediately after the instant case, E does not respond to the investigation on the ground that he/she was dispatched after receiving a report, even though he/she was out of his/her dog, face, etc., and returned to the police station after receiving the report, and does not respond to the investigation. The report to the police officer for more than three hours, which reported to the police officer for more than three hours, and want to punish the defendant, and the defendant was voluntarily present at the police station.