logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2014.02.11 2013고단2270
마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
Text

1. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year;

2. Seized evidence 1 or 2 shall be confiscated;

3. The defendant shall bear 200,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Even if the Defendant is not a narcotics handler, he dealt with the psychotropic drugs-related Mesponty (one philophone, hereinafter referred to as “philophone”), as follows:

1. On August 13, 2013, the Defendant sold KRW 100,000,000, a penphone-phone ( approximately 0.07gggggs) in the vicinity of Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Gangdong-gu Madong to C at one-time injection equipment located in Gangdong-gu Madong.

2. On August 27, 2013, the Defendant put about approximately 0.06g of oponon in a single-use PC toilet located in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government for injection into his left part of blood, after dilutioning the copon with 0.06gs into a single-use copon, and administered the copon to his left part of blood.

3. On August 29, 2013, around 15:30 on August 29, 2013, the Defendant: (a) carried approximately KRW 0.7 grams, which is contained in the disposable injection equipment, in order to receive and sell KRW 800,000,000,000 from the subway Station C, located in Gangdong-gu, Gangdong-gu, Seoul, 3, 201.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the defendant in court;

1. The legal statement of the witness C;

1. Statement by the prosecution against C;

1. Each investigation report;

1. Ratification;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on seizure records;

1. Articles 60 (1) 2, 4 (1), and 2 subparagraph 3 (b) of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. and selection of imprisonment with labor for an offense under the relevant Act;

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 Narcotics Control Act;

1. Taking into account all the sentencing conditions indicated in the records, such as the defendant's family relation, that there was a history that the defendant was punished for the same offense in the reason of sentencing under the proviso of Article 67 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., the defendant denies a part of the crime, the defendant's refusal to reflect and repeat the medication part, and

arrow