Whether and its content

The narcotics under the Narcotics Act shall not be determined by the quantity of the narcotics containing the narcotics, but only the fact that the narcotics contain the narcotics, which is natural in light of the intent of the narcotics offender.

Articles 60, 4, and 23 of the Narcotics Act

Defendant

Defendant

Seoul Criminal Court of the first instance (68Da11077)

The appeal is dismissed.

One hundred and twenty-five days of detention days prior to the imposition of judgment after appeal shall be included in the imprisonment of the original judgment.

The court below erred in finding the defendant's facts constituting an offense, and found the drug of this case, which is extremely low-level hedges, as narcotics, although they are not narcotics. According to the court below's decision, the legal application of this case is not clear. Thus, the court below's decision has the grounds for appeal.

However, according to the court below's decision, the court below acknowledged that he manufactured narcotics without a license, which is a criminal fact of the defendant, by comprehensively taking into account the defendant's statement in the court below's court below's statement, the suspect interrogation protocol of the defendant prepared by the prosecutor and the judicial police officer's handling affairs, the statement of the statement of the non-indicted 1 prepared by the judicial police officer's handling affairs, the appraisal statement prepared by the appraiser non-indicted 2, the appraisal statement prepared by the appraiser non-indicted 2, the 290gs, body 1, and the present presence of alcohol half, and since each of the above evidence admitted by the court below is admissible as evidence, it is sufficient to find the defendant guilty of the criminal facts of the court below's judgment based on these evidence, and there is no error in the judgment of the court below and the finding of facts, and the narcotics under the Narcotics Act are not determined by the quantity of the narcotics contained therein, and it is natural in light of the purpose of the Narcotics Act that the narcotics contained by the defendant in this case contains narcotics as evidence.

The criminal facts of the defendant, recognized by the court below, fall under Articles 60, 4, and 23 (1) of the Narcotics Act, and Article 60 of the Narcotics Act shall apply to the defendant's criminal facts. The explanation of the reasoning of the court below is that Article 60 of the same Act shall apply to the defendant's criminal facts. Thus, although Article 60 of the same Act prohibits an act subject to Article 60 of the same Act in the indication of the application of the same Act and does not explain Article 4(b) and Article 23 of the same Act, there is a defect that caused the application of the Acts and subordinate statutes by failing to explain that Article 4(1) of the same Act does not apply. However, unless the court below states that Article 423(1) of the same Act violates Article 4 and Article 23(1) of the Narcotics Act, it cannot be deemed that the court below did not apply or did not indicate that the application of the Acts and subordinate statutes by the court below did not affect the judgment, even if it stated only Article 60 of the Narcotics Act.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the 125 days of detention after the appeal is filed shall be included in the sentence of the court below, by applying Article 57(4) of the Criminal Act.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judge Man-hun (Presiding Judge) Counsel