A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Smokings made free of seizure (No. 2) shall be confiscated.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is not a person dealing with narcotics, and he/she shall not deal with Metephographs (one philophone, hereinafter referred to as "philophones") which are local mental drugs.

On February 26, 2016, the Defendant administered philophones in the vicinity of the hotel “D” near the hotel “D” in which the Defendant was injured, in a way that the Defendant puts philophones in the glass pipe, which is a philophone smoking machine, and then puts the philophones into a rophone by heating the philophones.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Seizure records;

1. A written appraisal of each drug;

1. Investigation report (11th page of investigation records);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (calculated an additional collection charge);

1. Article 60 (1) 2, Article 4 (1) 1, and subparagraph 3 (b) of Article 2 of the Act on the Selection and Management of Narcotics, Etc. concerning facts constituting an offense (the choice of imprisonment with prison labor);

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. Reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act;

1. Scope of punishment: From January to ten years;

2. Three types (referring to the scope of the area of recommendation), including medication, simple possession, etc. of narcotics (referring to the item (b), (c) and (c)) [Special Sentencing] increased factors: The area of the same criminal history (limited to the area of suspended execution within three years), the area of aggravated punishment (limited to the area of recommendation), one year to three years.

3. The Defendant, who was sentenced to the suspended sentence twice for a crime related to narcotics, was sentenced to the suspended sentence twice, and the Defendant was in possession of a phiphone smoking machine in favor of the Defendant at the time of the instant crime, with frequent departure from the Republic of Korea from the Republic of Korea, and according to the statement of narcotics appraisal, the Defendant’s reaction to the training of phiphones took place in the part where the length is at least 3 cm from the maternity near the mother’s hair during the Defendant’s hair. As such, in full view of the fact that the Defendant is presumed to have performed the administration of phiphones even before the instant medication, the Defendant appears to have performed the administration of phiphones several times.