(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.12.3. 선고 2014고합696 판결

Six injections (50cc) 2(3)(2014Gohap696 No. 1), one disposable divers (2) divers divers divers divers divers divers divers divers divers divers divers divers divers divers divers divers dives gs 1,067g1)(2, 3) dives 2014 high-scale 11133) shall be confiscated.

1,360,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

Reasons

Facts of crime

On July 4, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with labor for a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. at the Incheon District Court on July 4, 2012, and completed the execution of the sentence on June 8, 2013, and is not a person handling narcotics.

"2014 Gohap696"

1. Violation of the Narcotics Control Act;

On May 20, 2014, at around 02:00, the Defendant d convenience stores located in Seocho-si, and drank approximately 0.02 g of psychotropic drugs, while moving to a F hotel located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the Defendant dump to dump.

Accordingly, the Defendant administered philophones.

2. Existing buildings and attempted fire prevention;

At around 04:18 on the same day, the Defendant 1501 room in Gangnam-gu Seoul EF hotel located in Gangnam-gu, for the above reasons, thought that the Defendant 125 guest rooms among the total 128 guest rooms 128 guest rooms, scam the scam to the above hotel, when the Defendant scam the scamphone in the 150 guest rooms and scam the scam in the 125 guest rooms.

The Defendant: (a) granted a deduction of all the cremations contained in the cremation box installed at the place; (b) laid off the floor by putting out the original hairs contained in the beer, and then laid off them on the floor; and (c) laid off the cremation box with a single-useer, which was in his possession, by attaching a fire to the hotel kitchen, etc.; (d) but (e) it was no longer set up on the wind operated by the beer.

Thus, the defendant tried to fire a building in which people exist by setting fire, but did not commit an attempted crime.

"2014 Gohap1133"

3. On July 2013, the Defendant received approximately KRW 500,000,00 from G in the name of 1 Dong-dong office of the so-called Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Seocheon-si, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and received approximately 0.7 g of philopon from G, in front of the Dong office of the so-called Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

Accordingly, the defendant purchased philophones.

4. On the same day, the Defendant received KRW 400,000 from H’s non-verification test fluencing passenger cars standing in front of Incheon Viewing City, Nam-gu, Incheon, and issued approximately 0.64 g of philopon to H, who received KRW 400,000 from H.

Accordingly, the defendant sold philophones.

5. The Defendant drank approximately 0.06 g of philopon to coffee at the heading room of the mother telecom, where it is difficult to know the trade name in the Namdong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Nam-gu.

Accordingly, the Defendant administered philophones.

6. On July 2013, the Defendant received KRW 300,000 from the Defendant 1,000,000,000,000 from the Defendant, in front of the influoral fluoral fluoral flusium in the fluoral fluoral flus, Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si.

Accordingly, the defendant purchased philophones.

7. On the same day, the Defendant: (a) received 300,000 won from I for oponon from IMW cars standing in front of the Do party apartment in front of the Do party apartment; and (b) granted 0.35 g of oponon to I.

Accordingly, the defendant sold philophones.

8. On September 1, 2013, at around 17:30, the Defendant received 300,000 Won from G, who was in front of the said JJ station, and received approximately 0.35 g of oponon from G.

Accordingly, the defendant purchased philophones.

9. At around 02:00 on the following day, the Defendant: (a) laid off from Kmotoel 506 in the vicinity of the said J; (b) KRW 300,000 from H, and granted approximately 0.35 g of opon to H.

Accordingly, the defendant sold philophones.

10. On September 2, 2013, the Defendant: (a) around 18:30 on September 22, 2013, received KRW 1,00,000 from G, in the presence of the Dong Office of the said Crophone, and received approximately 1.4g of the rophone from G.

Accordingly, the defendant purchased philophones.

11. The Defendant, at around 20:00 on the same day, injected approximately 0.05 g of philopon into a single-use cell, in a single-use cell in which the trade name near the above heart 1 Dongdong Office is unknown, and then injected into the Defendant’s arms.

Accordingly, the Defendant administered philophones.

12. On September 24, 2013, at around 15:55, the Defendant had approximately 1.176 gopon in the passenger car parked in front of the Dong Office 1 Dong-dong Office, and had approximately 1.176 gopon in the Defendant’s household room.

Accordingly, the defendant possessed a philophone.

Summary of Evidence

"2014 Gohap696"

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness M and N;

1. Each investigation report (the confirmation of a discharge point, the prevention of fire, the state of a hotel at the time of fire prevention, the analysis of CCTVs of the F hotel, and the submission of a estimate for the repair of a hotel);

1. On-site inspection reports, reports on fire occurrence, appraisal reports, and comprehensive reports on fire accidents;

1. The current status of guests, written estimates, and each other;

1. Each photograph, on-site photograph, CD;

1. Seizure records;

1. Inquiry letter, each investigation report (pre-disposition, confirmation, attachment of the decision, and confirmation of the date of release of the suspect), report on the results of confirmation of previous convictions before and after the disposition, each decision, and current status of personal identifications and confinements;

[2] As to Paragraph 2 of this Article, the police officers and the defense counsel asserts that there was no intention of fire prevention. The fire officers and the fire officers called out to the scene category the windows near the floor in light of salvance and burning pattern. There are no electrical, mechanical, and gas pipes so that the combustion caused by electrical, mechanical, and gas elements are excluded. Moreover, there is little possibility of combustion due to human care because there was no discovery of the causes of cigarette but at the vicinity of the salption point, such as cigarette butts or two seconds. At the time of the outbreak, it seems that the original body was damaged and the salption of the salphere and its hair were artificially used as a intermediary for the combustion of the salphere and the salphere. In light of the fact that the Defendant appeared to have died or died of the salphere, it is difficult to view that there was no objective difference between the Defendant and the salphere of the salphere and the salphere.

"2014 Gohap1133"

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Two copies of the suspect examination protocol of the police officer in G; and

1. Details of currency;

1. Each written appraisal;

1. Seizure records;

Application of Statutes

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

Articles 60(1)2, 4(1)1, and 2 subparag. 3(b) (Article 60(1) of the Narcotics Control Act, Article 60(1)2, Article 4(1)1, Article 2 subparag. 3(b) of the Act on the Management of Narcotics, Etc., and Articles 174 and 164(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

Article 35 of the Criminal Act: Provided, That with respect to the crimes of attempted fire-prevention of existing buildings, the proviso of Article 42 of the Criminal Act shall apply.

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Articles 37(former part), 38(1)2, and 50 of the Criminal Act (Aggravation of concurrent crimes within the limit of the proviso of Article 42 of the Criminal Act as stipulated in the crime of false and existing structure or attempted crime of arson)

1. Confiscation;

The main sentence of Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act, and Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act

1. Additional collection:

2) Grounds for calculation of additional collection under the proviso to Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act: 10,000 won (on April 201, 2014, average nationwide market price of penphones as of April 1, 201) + 50,000 won (on the market price of paragraph (3) of this Article, 00,000 won (on the market price of 0.7g of penphones) + 300,000 won (on the market price of paragraph (6) of this Article, and 0.35g of penphones), + 300,000 won (on the market price of paragraph (8) of this Article, and 0.35g of written phones), + 160,00 won (on the market price of 1,00,000 won (on the market price of phiphonephones), 100,000 won (on the market price of 1.4g of phiphonephones) + 1610,14g of g g.

Reasons for sentencing

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Three years to fifty years; or

2. Application of the sentencing criteria;

(a) Violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (flavoon) by medication of phiphones;

[Determination of Types] Medication, simple possession, etc. (Type 3) of a narcotics crime group.

[Special Aggravationd Persons] Aggravationd: Cooperation in investigations as important for criminal records and mitigations:

[Scope of Recommendation] Imprisonment of 10 months to 2 years (Basic Area)

(b)that the sentencing criteria do not apply to existing buildings and attempted crimes of fire prevention;

[Determination of Type] marijuth, native item (b) and (c), etc. (Type 2) of the Narcotics Crime Group

[Special Aggravationd Persons] Aggravationd: Cooperation in investigations as important for criminal records and mitigations:

[Scope of Recommendation] One year to two years (Basic Area) imprisonment

(d) Crimes of violating the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (frighting) by carrying phiphones;

[Determination of Types] Medications, simple possession, etc. of a narcotics crime group; items (b) and (c) of this Article (Type 3)

[Special Aggravationd Persons] Aggravationd: Cooperation in investigations as important for criminal records and mitigations:

[Scope of Recommendation] Imprisonment of 10 months to 2 years (Basic Area)

(e) The scope of final recommendation: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than one year (the sentencing criteria are not applicable to the crime of attempted fire-prevention of existing buildings, so that the lower limit of the sentencing range for each crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (fence) due to the purchase and sale of phiphonephones for which the sentencing criteria

3. Determination of sentence: Three years of imprisonment;

As seen earlier, even if the Defendant was punished as a repeated crime with the history of punishment for phiphones, and was released from the prison, the Defendant traded and administered phiphones several times within a relatively short period of time after being released from the prison, and thereafter, sold and administered phiphones. In that the use of psychotropic drugs is highly likely to harm the health and social safety of the people, such as addictions or dependences, etc. In addition, the Defendant tried to extinguish the blick to a hotel in a congested state after the phiphone medication. At the time, in the hotel, the Defendant was in a situation where there was a white name, such as customers, employees, etc., which would have caused a large number of harm to human life, and caused property damage therefrom. Nevertheless, in light of these circumstances, the Defendant was not able to make efforts to recover damage caused by fire, and the victim was also punished against the Defendant. In light of these circumstances, the Defendant’s strict punishment is necessary.

However, the defendant led to the confession of crimes related to philophones and cooperate in the investigation of the relevant narcotics crimes.

The punishment shall be determined as ordered in consideration of all the sentencing conditions shown in the pleadings, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, circumstances after the crime, etc. of the defendant.

jury verdict and sentencing opinion;

1. A verdict of guilt or innocence;

○ Facts against all jurors

2. Opinions on sentencing

○ Three years of imprisonment: Eight jurors.

○ Imprisonment with prison labor for two years and six months: One juror.

Judges

The judges of the presiding judge;

Judges Kim Gin-hee

Judges Lee Jae-ho

Note tin

(i) balance remaining after 0.109g in total used for appraisal;

2) Confiscation or collection under Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act is not for the purpose of deprivation of the benefits derived from a criminal act, but rather for punitive measures. Thus, even if there were no benefits arising from the criminal act, the court shall order the additional collection of the value. If there are several persons who committed the crime with regard to the scope of the additional collection, the full amount of the value of the narcotics shall be ordered to be collected within the scope they handled (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 92Do3250, Mar. 23, 1993; 2015158, Dec. 28, 2001). Since a series of acts by the defendant who handled the same narcotics, etc., conducted within the scope of the additional collection, would not be deemed as having been ordered to be collected separately for each act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 200Do3969, Mar. 14, 197; 200Do39697, Apr. 16, 2008).

참조조문

-마약류 관리에 관한 법률

-마약류 관리에 관한 법률 제2조 제3호 나목

-마약류 관리에 관한 법률 제4조 제1항 제1호

-마약류 관리에 관한 법률 제60조 제1항 제2호