(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.8.16. 선고 2017고합204 판결

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Cases

Defendant

Prosecutor

Defense Counsel

Imposition of Judgment

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.8.16. 선고 2017고합204 판결

가.마약류관리에관한법률위반(대마)나,마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)

Cases

2017Gohap204A. Violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (mariana)

B. Violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (fence)

Defendant

1. A;

2. B

3. C.

Prosecutor

Newly Inserted by Act No. 1010, Mar. 21, 201>

Defense Counsel

Law Firm D (for Defendant A)

Attorney E

Attorney F (for the defendant A)

Law Firm G (Defendant B)

[Defendant-Appellant]

Attorney I (for the defendant C)

Imposition of Judgment

August 16, 2017

Text

Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for two years, by imprisonment for two years, by imprisonment for one year.

However, with respect to Defendant B and C, the execution of each of the above punishments shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The seized green plant 1,55g (No. 1), 2.95g (No. 2), b.95g (Evidence 2), 1 deposit passbook (Evidence 7), 1 (Evidence 8), 5,82g (Evidence 9), 1 (Evidence 10), 1 (No. 13), 5, 29KH/A, 1 (No. 24) of electronic information contained in a mobile phone (No. 17), 1 of transparent glass disease (No. 10), 1 of electronic information (No. 5, M29K/A, 8: J) in a mobile phone shall be forfeited from the Defendant A, respectively.

54,240,00 won shall be additionally collected from Defendant A.

Reasons

Criminal History Office

【Public Offering Relations between Defendants】

On July 2016, Defendant A sold narcotics, such as marijuana and psychotropic drugs, supplied through the U.S. L, etc., and divided profits from the sale of the narcotics, etc., which he became aware of after receipt of a proposal, Defendant A sent a notice of sales of narcotics, etc. by linking them to “M,” “N,” “T,” “T,” etc., which is an Internet deep web site,” and then notified Defendant A of the place of sales by directly selling them by means of a specific place (such as mail box or outdoor container, etc.). Defendant A received an order from the above site visitors who wish to purchase the narcotics through an encrypted writing using a one-day “GGGGG key,” and then received a transfer of bitco to the account of Bitco, which is a virtual currency he manages, and then offered it to the purchaser and the purchaser by directly selling them.

Defendant B, at the same time, opened an account to receive bitcos sent from the buyers of narcotics, etc. for the payment, and transferred the bitcos deposited to cash through the exchange located in Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government or the bitcos' "(jumbroom) 100,000 won per case", and accepted the proposal, and employed Defendant A as a money laundering or exchange for the sales proceeds of narcotics.

On September 2016, Defendant C, upon receiving a proposal from Defendant C to the effect that “The amount of KRW 300,000 is to be paid to 300,000 per week at the site of delivery after leaving narcotics, etc. at a specific place, Defendant C was employed as a delivery book for narcotics by Defendant A.

As a result, the Defendants conspired with K to sell and sell narcotics to many unspecified people.

【Criminal Facts】

No person shall trade marijuana, and any person other than a person handling narcotics shall trade, trade, deliver or receive psychotropic drugs.

Defendants are not narcotics handlers.

1. The Defendants’ co-principal

Defendant A, at around 18:51 on December 4, 2016, up to 18:51, up to 10,000, up to 1.5 g (1.5 g (1.52 g) 10,000, up to 10.5 g (up to 10.5 g) g (up to 10,000) g (up to 1.6 g (up to 7.5 g) 10, up to 17, up to 10,000, up to 10,000 g (up to 6.5 g) 17, up to 10,000, up to 17,0000 (up to 6.5 g) g (up to 7,000) g (up to 1.5 g) g) g (up to 10,000) g) g (up to 17, 106-6,000

Accordingly, the Defendants sold psychotropic drugs and marijuana in collusion with K.

2. Joint criminal conduct by Defendant A and B;

On July 6, 2016, at the French site around 17:58, Defendant A: (a) reported marijuana sales letters posted on the previous “M” website; and (b) promised to sell for KRW 130,000,000 for 130,000; (c) deposited bitcoin (0.15109105BTC) equivalent to the price (1.30,000) in his bitcocoin’s account; (d) deposited 1g of marijuana acquired through K at a low time on the same day; and (e) transported 1g of the Republic of Korea V Multicocolon’s loan in a way of hiding it to U; and (e) having Defendant B deposited 10,000,000 for 15,000,000,0000,000 won through the catco’s own account (1.5,015,000,000,000 won).

Accordingly, the Defendants sold and sold marijuana in collusion with K.

3. Defendant A

A. On January 23, 2017, around 23:00, the Defendant issued and received two g of philopon to L, X, and name-free boxes (one-time “Y”) in the dwelling area of L located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 406.

B. On February 6, 2017, at around 18:00, the Defendant purchased the above W Building 406, the above L, X, and nameless boxes (one-day L, X, and one-day “YY”) by paying 35,000 won per bottle (the sum 2.10,000 won) to six of the electronic tobacco free car storage in liquid form.

C. On February 13, 2017, around 13:30, the Defendant entered the second floor parking lot of Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Ztel underground (A) with vinyl 4.58gh, which is located in the lower part of the lower part of the driver’s seat of the second floor, and carried with a female with a vinyl 1g, which is contained in a hemp machine.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. The witness C’s legal statement (as to the defendant A)

1. References for appraisal - gene and replys to respective requests for appraisal; and

1. Details of detailed addresses of wallets by cluster, certificates of deposit transaction records, customer information inquiry table, customer information transaction details, subscriber's personal information, transaction details of Category A joints, B joints transaction details, financial transaction details of each national bank, details of new bank financial transaction, details of new bank financial transaction, 90 copies of broom photographs stored in suspect Cop 6S;

1. Each police seizure record and the list of seizure;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to report internal investigation and investigation;

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

(a) Defendant A: Articles 59(1)7 and 3 subparag. 7 of the Narcotics Control Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of sale of marijuana after November 3, 2016); Articles 60(1)2, 4(1)1, and 2 subparag. 3(b) of the Narcotics Control Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act; Article 59(3) and 7 of the Narcotics Control Act; Articles 30(1)7 and 30 subparag. 7 of the Criminal Act; Article 30 (the attempted sale of marijuana after November 3, 2016); Article 30(1)7 of the former Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (the former Act was amended by Act No. 14019, Nov. 3, 2016; Article 60 subparag. 7 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc.; Article 9(1)6(b) of the former Act on the Management of Narcotics, Etc.; Article 7(10(2) of the Act on the Management of Narcotics, etc.

(b) Defendant B: Articles 59(1)7 and 3 subparag. 7 of the Narcotics Control Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of sale of marijuana after November 3, 2016), Articles 60(1)2, 4(1)1, and 2 subparag. 3(b), Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of sale of opon, choice of imprisonment), Article 59(3) and (1)7 and Article 3 subparag. 7 of the Narcotics Control Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of sale of marijuana after November 3, 2016), Articles 59(1)7 and 3 subparag. 9 of the former Narcotics Control Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of sale of marijuana after November 3, 2016)

(c) Defendant C: Articles 59(1)7 and 3 subparag. 7 of the Narcotics Control Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of sale of marijuana after November 3, 2016), Articles 60(1)2, 4(1)1, and 2 subparag. 3(b), Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of sale of opon, choice of imprisonment), Articles 59(3) and 59(1)7, and 3 subparag. 7 of the Narcotics Control Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of attempted sale of marijuana after November 3, 2016)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

(a) Defendant A: the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (the aggravation of concurrent crimes with punishment prescribed in the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc.) due to the sale of marijuana as of December 6, 2016, when the nature of the crime and the circumstances of the crime are the largest);

(b) Defendant B: the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (the aggravation of concurrent crimes with punishment prescribed in the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc.) due to the sale of marijuana from December 6, 2016, when the nature of the crime and the circumstances of the crime are the largest)

(c) Defendant C: the former part of Article 37, Articles 38(1)2 and 50 of the Criminal Act (an aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes with punishment prescribed in the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc.) due to the sale of marijuana from December 6, 2016, when the nature of the crime and the circumstances of the crime are the largest)

1. Suspension of execution;

Defendant B and C: Each Criminal Code Article 62(1)(The following extenuating circumstances are considered in favor of the reasons for sentencing)

1. Confiscation;

Defendant A: The evidence submitted by the Prosecutor alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the funds provided for each crime as stated in the judgment of the first sentence of Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act (Provided, That it is insufficient to recognize that the evidence alone, which was seized by the Prosecutor, are funds provided for each crime as stated in the judgment of the first sentence of Article 67 (No. 614 (No. 11) and No. 400 (No. 14), or that they are earnings from each crime, and

1. Additional collection:

Defendant A: proviso to Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act

[Calculation of Surcharge] 54,240,000 won in total

○ Sales of Handphonephones Nos. 3.5g1) and marijus No. 507.1g: Total sales amount of KRW 53,430,000.

00,000 won (=retail 300,000 won per 2g X 1g of opon) in the case of paragraph 3(b) purchase of 6-free-of-paragraph 3(b) marijuana amount: 210,000 won in total of the purchase price;

Reasons for sentencing

1. Defendant A

(a) The scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for one year to 45 years; and

(b) Application of the sentencing criteria;

1. First offense: The offense of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (mariana) by selling marijuana; and

[Scope of Recommendation] Reduction Areas of Type 2 (marijus, flags, items (b) and (c), etc.) ( Imprisonment of eight months to one year)

[Special Mitigation (Aggravated Mitigation)] In the event that there is a reason to take special account of the commission of a crime or the motive of a crime, important cooperation in an investigation (Mitigation) / systematic or professional crimes (Aggravated Punishment)

2. Second offense: the offense of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (mariana) by the purchase of marijuana;

[Scope of Recommendation] Trade Mediation, etc.

[Special Mitigation (Aggravated Mitigation)] In the event that there is a reason to take special account of the participation in or motive for the commission of a crime, important cooperation in investigation (reduction) / systematic or professional crimes (Aggravated Punishment)

3. Third offense: the offense of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (flag) by selling phiphones; and

[Scope of Recommendation] Reduction Areas of Type 2 (marijus, flags, items (b) and (c), etc.) ( Imprisonment of eight months to one year)

* The result of the aggravation of multiple crimes (the first crime maximum + the second crime maximum + the third crime maximum + the 1/2 + the third crime maximum): : 8 months to 2 years [the above crimes with respect to which the sentencing guidelines are set and the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (mariju) due to the attempted sale of marijuana for which the sentencing guidelines are not set are in the relation of concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act; therefore, only the lower limit of the recommended punishment according to the guidelines for handling multiple crimes for which the sentencing guidelines are set

The circumstances are favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant has recognized all of his criminal acts and committed a mistake in depth, the defendant appears to have been unable to keep the crime of this case early due to the strong demand by K, etc., and that the defendant actively cooperated with the investigation by providing information on the upper line that supplied narcotics to the investigation agency to help arrest them, and that there is no previous difference between the defendant and the defendant. The crimes related to narcotics are likely to harm the national health or cause another crime, and cause other crimes, and have a significant negative impact on society as a whole due to their sense and toxicity, and the defendant conspired to distribute the profits with K, etc., and distributed large quantities of marijuana and phiphones to many unspecified persons, and the defendant led them to the crime of this case by inducing B and C to instruct them to deliver narcotics, etc. and exchange sales proceeds, etc.

In addition, the defendant's age, occupation, character and conduct, family relationship, the circumstances and results of the crime of this case, and all of the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime, shall be comprehensively considered as ordered.

2. Defendant B

(a) The scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for one year to 45 years; and

(b) Application of the sentencing criteria;

1. First offense: The offense of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (mariana) by selling marijuana; and

[Scope of Recommendation] Reduction Areas of Type 2 (marijus, flags, items (b) and (c), etc.) ( Imprisonment for 8 months - one year and six months)

[Special Mitigation] Where there is a reason to take special account of the commission of a crime or the motive for the crime.

【General Mitigation Doctrine】

2. Second crime: the crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (fence) by selling phiphones; and

[Scope of Recommendation] Reduction Areas of Type 2 (marijus, flags, items (b) and (c), etc.) ( Imprisonment of eight months to one year)

[Special Mitigation] Where there is a reason to take special account of the commission of a crime or the motive for the crime.

【General Mitigation Doctrine】

* The result of the aggravation of multiple crimes (the first crime maximum + the second crime maximum 1/2): Imprisonment with prison labor from August to February 2.

【Violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (mariana) by attempted sale of marijuana for which the sentencing guidelines are set and the sentencing guidelines are not set are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Therefore, considering only the lower limit of the recommended punishment according to the standards for handling multiple crimes of each of the above crimes for which

The following are the circumstances that are favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant recognized all of his criminal acts; (b) the Defendant appears to have taken part in the instant criminal act in depth; (c) the Defendant appears to have taken part in the instant criminal act upon A’s recommendation; and (d) the Defendant appears to have not taken part in the profit from the instant criminal act; and (c) the Defendant is a primary offender who has no previous criminal record. Narcotics-related crime is a significant negative impact on the society as a whole due to harm to national health or another crime; and (d) decliation and toxicity; and (c) the Defendant takes charge of exchanging the sales proceeds of narcotics in accordance with A’s instructions, and distributed large quantities of marijuana and s

3. Defendant C.

(a) The scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for one year to 45 years; and

(b) Application of the sentencing criteria;

1. First offense: The offense of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (mariana) by selling marijuana; and

[Scope of Recommendation] Trade Mediation, etc.

[Special Mitigation] Where there is a reason to take special account of the commission of a crime or the motive for the crime.

【General Mitigation Doctrine】

2. Second crime: the crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (fence) by selling phiphones; and

[Scope of Recommendation] Trade Mediation, etc.

[Special Mitigation] Where there is a reason to take special account of the commission of a crime or the motive for the crime.

【General Mitigation Doctrine】

* The result of the aggravation of multiple crimes (the first crime maximum + the second crime maximum 1/2): Imprisonment with prison labor from August to February 2.

【Violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (mariana) by attempted sale of marijuana for which the sentencing guidelines are set and the sentencing guidelines are not set are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Therefore, only the lowest limit of the recommended punishment in accordance with the standards for handling multiple crimes of each of the above crimes for which

The circumstances are favorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant has recognized all of his criminal acts and committed a mistake in depth, the Defendant appears to have been simply involved in the instant criminal act upon A’s recommendation, the fact that the Defendant appears to have not been able to profit from the instant criminal act, and the fact that the Defendant does not have any previous one, etc. A is favorable to the Defendant. Narcotics-related crimes have a significant negative impact on the society as a whole due to harm to national health or another crime, and decliation and toxicity. The Defendant is in charge of delivering narcotics, etc. according to A’s instructions, and distributed large quantities of marijuana and phiphones to many and unspecified persons.