(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.10.15 2015노1209 | 리걸엔진

beta

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

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.10.15 2015노1209

마약류관리에관한법률위반(마약)

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) did not have cultivated the Defendant’s mass return expenses as stated in the facts charged (hereinafter “the instant mass return expenses”) by either cutting out or managing, etc.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is not a hotel, but a narcotics handler.

The defendant from April 20, 2014 to the same year.

5. From the 17:00 on June 16, 17:00, the Defendant: (a) maintained 64 poppy, which is an plant used as a raw material for narcotics, that had been born in approximately 9.9 square meters in front of “D” gardening (three square meters); and (b) cultivated 64 moppy (marif).

B. The lower court determined that: (a) in light of the following: (b) the Defendant was the person in the front garden of “D” in the Defendant’s operation, which can be deemed as the Defendant’s control area (hereinafter “instant garden”); (c) the Defendant was in possession of frying expenses without gathering them; and (d) the Defendant was already recommended to remove the instant fying expenses on the said garden; (c) the Defendant was already urged to remove the instant fying expenses from the police officer; (d) but (e) the Defendant was neglected to do so and re-controled, even if the Defendant was not directly in charge of the instant fying expenses, the lower court determined that the fact that the Defendant discovered and managed the instant fying expenses that the Defendant was the person in the said garden

C. However, we cannot agree with the judgment of the court below for the following reasons.

Criminal facts in a criminal trial shall be established based on strict evidence with probative value, which leads a judge to have the degree of having no reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to fully reach the degree of such conviction, even if the defendant’s assertion or defense is contradictory or uncomfortable, and there is a doubt of guilt should be determined based on the defendant’s interest.

The act of cultivating poppy is a poppy.

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 홍성지원 2015.04.03 2014고정173

-청주지방법원 제천지원 2017.03.16 2017고정5

-광주지방법원 2017.07.05 2016노4953

-수원지방법원 2016.06.03 2016노966

-전주지방법원 2019.01.18 2018노1415