logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.01.24 2017고단4997
마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
Text

The punishment of the accused shall be determined by a year of imprisonment.

10,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with labor for a violation of the Narcotics Control Act at the Changwon District Court on August 8, 2014, and on June 6, 2015, was not a person who completed the execution of the sentence at the smuggling detention house on June 6, 2015, nor a person who handles narcotics.

1. On November 2016, the Defendant received approximately 0.06g of the psychotropic drugs from DMoel located in Kimhae-si, Kim Jong-si, and received them from E, using approximately 0.06g of the Melopon (one philopon; hereinafter “philopon”).

2. The Defendant administered a psychotropic medicine at the time and place set forth in paragraph 1, in a single-use injection machine, and in a way that injects the diaphone into water and injects it into the following arms.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of E;

1. The respective legal statements of F and G in part;

1. Statement protocol (part) made by the prosecution against E;

1. E statements;

1. Previous convictions: The results of inquiry, investigation report (the previous and attached report on narcotics, etc.), data on individual acceptance [E specifically stated to the defendant about the circumstances of the formation and administration of the Defendant’s penphones, and relatively consistent statement about the circumstances of the receipt and administration of the Defendant’s penphones.” G’s statement that “I sold approximately 0.1g of the penphones to E at the time near the DNA telephones around the day following the entry of the facts charged in this case,” and that “I administered the penphones from the DNA before that time,” correspond to the E’s statement; “The Defendant was able to take one’s own room in the DNA, and was able to take the phone back at the place after that time.”

“The Defendant stated,” the Defendant was residing at the home near the above telecom, and E was accommodated in the above telecom.

arrow