Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive, each of the above defendants is against the defendants.

Punishment of the crime

1. On February 2015, the Defendants were urged to purchase philopon from D to purchase philopon. On February 22, 2015, Defendant A, at around 22:00, 15,000, 150,000 won to D. In return, the Defendants received approximately 0.05 grams of psychotropic drugs from D (one philopon; hereinafter referred to as “philopon”).

The Defendants conspired to sell and sell psychotropic drugs, even though they are not authorized to handle narcotics.

2. On February 2015, the Defendants were ambiguous to purchase phiphones from D and to administer them. Defendant B, at the same place as indicated in paragraph (1), around 08:00 on the first half of February 2015, 15,50,000 won to D, and the Defendants, at the same time as indicated in paragraph (1), 0.05g of phiphones from D and 0.05g of phiphones were stored into two phiphones for a single use, and were dilution into water and injected into the Defendants’ arms.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to sell and administer psychotropic drugs, even though they are not authorized to handle narcotics.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Protocol concerning the interrogation of the Defendants by the prosecution

1. Protocol concerning the suspect interrogation of each of the Defendants

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of each protocol of police statement concerning D;

1. Defendants: Articles 60 (1) 2, 4 (1) 1, and 2 subparagraph 3 (b) of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc., Article 30 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment for a crime;

1. Defendants from among concurrent crimes: the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act; and

1. Defendants on probation: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendants on probation: Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. The Defendants: (a) even though the Defendants, on the grounds of sentencing under the proviso of Article 67 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc., were suspended on or around August 2014, were subject to a disposition of suspension of indictment for the same offense, they were under the unfavorable circumstances in the instant crime; (b)