A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

subparagraph 1 of the seized evidence shall be forfeited from the accused.

Punishment of the crime

1. Notwithstanding that the Defendant is not a handler of narcotics, etc., on June 10, 2016, the Defendant administered narcotics, etc. by inserting approximately 0.07 g of mert clopon (hereinafter referred to as “one philopon”), which is a local mental medicine, at the Defendant’s residence located in Nam-gu Busan, Busan, around a night of June 10, 2016, into a single-use injection machine, dilution with water, and injection with the blood transfusion, such as left hand.

2. On June 11, 2016, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act: (a) from the Defendant’s residence located in Busan Southern-gu, Busan-gu, to the entrance of the Busan National Police Agency located in 999 as the center of the Busan National Police Agency, the Defendant driven a DSS5 car in a state where it is apprehended that the Defendant would not drive a motor vehicle normally by administering a phiphone, and would not drive a motor vehicle normally.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Seizure records;

1. Investigation report (to attach CCTV photographs to vehicles in a suspect's rectangular condition);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each letter of prosecution (written expert evidence, seized articles and written expert evidence);

1. Article 60 (1) 2, Article 4 (1) 1, subparagraph 3 (b) of Article 2, Article 148-2 (3) and Article 45 of the Road Traffic Act, Articles 148-2 (3) and 45 of the Act on the Management of Narcotics, etc. under the relevant Act on criminal facts;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. The main sentence of Article 67 of the Act on the Management of Confiscated Narcotics;

1. The defendant for reasons of sentencing in the proviso of Article 67 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. shall be sentenced in consideration of the fact that he has been punished for narcotics crimes in 2001 and, in particular, he appears to have continuously administered phiphonephones in light of the results of the maternity appraisal, the fact that he is not cooperative in the investigation, such as attempting to rescue the upper line, and the fact that he seems to have high risk of recidivism, such as a majority of the other driving criminal records prior to