2016Gohap1226 Violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (fence)

A

A new post, Kim-goods (public trial)

Attorney B (Korean National Assembly)

February 10, 2017

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

To order the accused to provide community service for 120 hours.

3,750,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

The amount equivalent to the above additional collection charge shall be ordered to be paid provisionally.

Criminal facts

Even if the Defendant is not a person handling narcotics, the Defendant treated the psychotropic drugs as follows 5F-UR-144 (referred to as XLR-11, hereinafter referred to as 'ESEL 11') designated as the psychotropic substances JWH-018 and its similar body:

1. On September 8, 2015, the Defendant purchased approximately KRW 4ml 2.50,000 from D in Gyeyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoul, for approximately 21:30,000.

2. On September 25, 2015, the Defendant received approximately 4ml from Gangnam-gu Seoul E and 207, Gangnam-gu, Seoul E and 207, and then transferred KRW 2.5ml to the bank account in the name of D, around 21:02, the Defendant purchased EXE-11 by remitting KRW 2.5ml to the bank account in the name of D, as purchase price of approximately 4ml.

3. On October 19, 2015, the Defendant decided to purchase EXE-11 from D on October 18:49, 2015, and then transferred KRW 2.50,000 to the bank account in the name of D, and around 20:22 on the same day, Gangnam-gu Seoul E and 207 received approximately 4ml from D, and purchased EXE-11 by receiving approximately 4ml from D.

4. On February 5, 2016, around 17:08, the Defendant purchased approximately KRW 4ml 2.50,000 from D in Gyeyang-gu C commercial building in Gyeyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoul.

5. On February 21, 2016, the Defendant decided to purchase approximately 4ml from D on February 20, 2016, and then transferred KRW 2.50,000 to the bank account in the name of D, and around 21:33, Gangnam-gu Seoul E. 207 received approximately 11ml from D by receiving approximately 4ml from D, EXE-11.

6. On February 23, 2016, the Defendant purchased approximately KRW 4ml 2.50,000 from D in Gyeyang-gu C commercial building in Gyeyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoul.

7. On February 29, 2016, the Defendant decided to purchase EXE 111 from D on February 20, 2016, and then transferred KRW 2.50,000 to the bank account in the name of D, and around 21:50 on the same day, the Defendant purchased EXE 11-11 by receiving approximately 4ml from D, Gangnam-gu Seoul E and 207, who sent EXE using Kwikset service.

8. On March 1, 2016, around 14:39, the Defendant purchased approximately KRW 1.6ml from D in Gyeyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoul, for about KRW 1.6ml.

9. On March 8, 2016, the Defendant purchased approximately KRW 8ml 50,000 from D in Gyeyang-gu C commercial building in Gyeyang-gu, Gyeyang-gu, Seoul, Seoyang-gu, Seoul, for approximately 14:25,00.

10. On March 14, 2016, the Defendant purchased approximately KRW 500,00,00 from D from D, EXE 11,00,00,000 from C commercial buildings in Gyeyang-gu, Gyeyang-gu, Seoul, Seoul.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A copy of each protocol of suspect examination of the police about D;

1. A copy of the F Statement;

1. [Certified Copies] Submission, seizure protocol, list of seizure, waiver of ownership, photograph (Evidence No. 12), summary appraisal document (No. 13), summary appraisal document (No. 13) / [Certified Copies] / [Attachment No. 15] / [Certified Copies] / [Attachment 19] / [Attachment 25] attached to the judgment of co-offenders concerned (No. 26], JWH-018 related documents (No. 27)

1. Each investigation report (the sequence 14, 20, 21, 22 of the evidence list);

Application of Statutes

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

Articles 58(1)3, 3 subparag. 5, and 2 subparag. 3 (a) of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc.

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (limited to concurrent crimes with punishment prescribed in the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (Psychotropic Crimes) due to Sale and purchase on March 1, 2016)

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (The following consideration for the reasons for sentencing):

1. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (The following consideration of favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

1. Social service order;

Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act

1. Additional collection:

The proviso to Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act (applicable for calculating a surcharge: Aggregate of purchase prices for each crime as stated in the judgment)

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Reasons for sentencing

1. Scope of applicable sentences under Acts: Imprisonment for two years and six months to twenty-two years; and

2. Scope of recommendations according to the sentencing criteria; and

[Determination of Type] Narcotics Crime Group, Trade Mediation, etc., Three Types (National Assembly Members A. (National Assembly Members)

[Special Sentencing) Purchasing for medication, simple possession, etc.

[Scope of Recommendation] Reduction Area (two years to five years of imprisonment)

3. Determination of sentence: Imprisonment with prison labor for a period of two years and six months, probation period of three years, community service, 120 hours, additional collection of KRW 3,750,000 is a serious crime that has a serious adverse impact on society as a whole, such as impairing national health as well as inducing another crime. The defendant's number of purchases of X-LL-1 reaches ten times and the number of purchases per one time is gradually increasing, and the responsibility is not easy in light of the content of the crime.

However, in light of the fact that the defendant's act of committing the crime in this case was recognized by the investigative agency in depth, the purchased EEL-11 cannot be seen as having been sold or distributed again, and the fact that narcotics were not detected in the urine and maternity test, it appears that the defendant did not habitually administer the crime in light of the fact that there was no detection of narcotics, etc. in the urine and maternity test. 2) there were some circumstances to be considered in light of the circumstance leading to the crime in this case, including the defendant's statement that he had been consulted and provided medical treatment from October 2014 to get out of uneasiness, and the defendant started taking advantage of narcotics, etc. to take advantage of the circumstance leading up to the crime in this case, there was no record of being sentenced to the suspension of execution or heavier punishment for the same crime, and that there was clear social relation between his family and several persons, such as the motive, means and result of the crime in this case, the age, career, career, personality and behavior of the defendant, family relationship, etc.

The judges of the presiding judge;

Judges Domen

Judges Go Young-han

1) There are not less than 3 crimes of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., which correspond to the same type.

2) Reference materials submitted by the defense counsel of the defendant after the closing of argument are referred to as evidence No. 4 (Medical Certificate).