The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Seized evidence 4, 5 each seizure

No. 3.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the lower court’s punishment (one year and six months of imprisonment, confiscation, additional collection of KRW 770,00) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant for ex officio judgment.

The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the entire facts charged by violating the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (flag) and assaulting, but the lower court erred by omitting pertinent legal provisions on the crime of assault in the application of statutes, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of judgment

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is ruled as follows through pleading.

[Discied reasoning of the judgment below] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court is the same as that of each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Articles 60 (1) 2, 4 (1) 1, and 2 subparagraph 3 (b) of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. [the point of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc.], Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the selection of imprisonment for a crime under the corresponding Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc.;

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

1. The main sentence of Article 67 of the Act on the Management of Confiscated Narcotics;

1. The proviso to Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the order of provisional payment is that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflected in the investigation, and cooperated with the investigation by actively making a statement about the upper line of the sales of philophones.

However, the nature and circumstances of the crime are not good by purchasing a large quantity of philophones and providing them to a third party in excess of their medication.

In addition, the crime of assault is not agreed with the victim.