logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.10.14 2016노1720
마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)등
Text

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Article 2 subparag. 3 of the Narcotics Control Act (hereinafter “Narcotic Control Act”), insofar as the Defendant, by misapprehending the legal principles, recognized the “psychotropic drug that is legally prohibited” at the time and place indicated in the facts charged, and committed an act prohibited under the Narcotics Control Act.

It should be viewed that the intention on this item is recognized.

Nevertheless, Article 2 subparagraph 3 of the Narcotics Control Act is objectively applied to the defendant.

Article 2 subparag. 3(b) of the Narcotics Control Act at the time of importing, accepting, using, and possessing psychotropic drugs (hereinafter “psychotropic drugs, such as 4-Mexampia”) containing “4-Mexamins”, “4-Mexamins”, “Mexamins”, and “Mexatos and their similar chains” (hereinafter “4-Mexamins, etc.”) falling under the psychotropic drugs.

The lower court rendered a not guilty verdict on this part of the facts charged on the ground that it appears to have been perceived as an “exporcers” which constitutes the psychotropic drugs as indicated in the item.

Imprisonment (five years of imprisonment, confiscation and collection 20,475,00 won) imposed by the court of unfair sentencing on the defendant is too uneasible and unfair.

Defendant

The above-mentioned sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

The lower court’s determination on the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine as to the prosecutor’s argument on the grounds of appeal is based on the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the Defendant, namely, the Defendant consistently expressed psychotropic drugs he imported, received, used, and possessed (hereinafter “instant psychotropic drugs”) as an “exporcers”, and the motive and circumstance that actually imported the instant psychotropic drugs, etc., the Defendant appears to have sold, imported, and possessed the instant psychotropic drugs with the knowledge of “exporcers.”

arrow