A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

No person shall grow plants used as raw materials for narcotics without obtaining approval from the Minister of Food and Drug Safety.

On June 1, 2017, at around 11:30, the Defendant cultivated 3.85 km, which is an plant used as a raw material for narcotics, in his/her dwelling garden located in North west-gun C, without obtaining approval from the Minister for Food and Drug Safety.

Summary of Evidence

1. Application of each Act and subordinate statute to response to the defendant's request for legal statement, investigation report (the process of detection of poppy gardenings);

1. Article 61 (1) 2 and Article 3 subparagraph 2 of the Act on the Selection and Management of Narcotics, Etc., and Selection of Imprisonment with prison labor for a crime;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (Consideration of favorable circumstances among the following grounds for sentencing);

1. Scope of the applicable sentencing under the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. subject to the punishment under the Act on the Grounds of Sentencing: The scope of the recommended punishment under the sentencing guidelines from January to five years from the imprisonment [the type] [the scope of the recommended punishment] [the person subject to special sentencing] [the scope of the recommended punishment] in cases where there are grounds for special consideration in the participation in the crime or the motive for the crime [the scope of the recommended punishment] mitigated area [the scope of the recommended punishment] [the scope of the recommended punishment] in this case where the defendant tried to maintain the strict management system for the narcotics, etc. in light of the purport of the same Act, in which he/she intends to cultivate the so-called mass returned amount prohibited from growing under the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., and in light of the purport of the same Act, the fact that the contents of the crime are minor, but not, are disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflects the mistake, that is the first offender, that is elderly health, and that the number of poppy cultivated by the defendant is not the 19 main amount, but does not seem to have been cultivated in business terms (Provided, That in light of the place, circumstance, quantity, etc. of cultivation, it does not seem that the defendant himself/herself does not have any self-help as argued by the defendant).