logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2020.02.26 2018고단3927
마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
Text

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

Reasons

1. On April 14, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. at the Suwon District Court on April 14, 2016, and completed the execution of the sentence in the Daegu Prison on June 6, 2017.

On October 2017, at around 15:00, the Defendant received approximately one gram of psychotropic drugs, which are psychotropic drugs contained in vinyl, from E, in the D-C cafeteria No. C cafeteria No. B located in Jung-gu Incheon, Jung-gu, Incheon, and received them without compensation.

2. On the other hand, there are two-time statements of witness F and F statements in the police as evidence that correspond to the facts charged in this case.

Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act recognizes admissibility of evidence only when it is proved that a person required to make a statement was made in an investigative agency under particularly reliable circumstances where the statement or preparation was made in cases where it is impossible to make a statement due to death, disease, foreign residence, unknown whereabouts, or any other similar cause. “When the statement was made under particularly reliable circumstances” under Article 314(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act refers to cases where there is little room for false intervention in the fact that the person made the statement, and where there is a specific and external circumstance to guarantee the credibility or voluntariness of the contents of the statement (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Do10926, Apr. 12, 2012). Moreover, in cases where the whereabouts of a witness is unknown, it is recognized admissibility of the statement or written statement made by the witness, etc., by recognizing an exception to the principle of direct deliberation, etc. by allowing the admissibility of evidence only where the requirements, such as the right of the defendant or defense counsel, are satisfied with respect to written evidence, such as a witness statement, etc.

arrow