Defendant

Defendant

In the case of an erroneous prosecution, the preceding citizen, the public trial;

Public-service Kim Tae

Busan District Court Decision 2012Da3765 Decided June 29, 2012

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-finding or misunderstanding of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (the part concerning the violation of law)

Notwithstanding the fact that the Defendant administered a psychotropic drug in the same manner as indicated in the facts charged at the time and place indicated in paragraph (1) of the facts charged (i.e., Nonindicted 2, who was aware of the fact that the Defendant was walopon on the part of the other members of the National Institute of Scientific Investigation and Research at the time and place indicated in the facts charged (i.e., he was walopon, which was waloned by Nonindicted 2, who was walopon on the part of the Defendant at the time and place indicated in the facts charged). However, the lower court concluded that the Defendant administered a walopon as indicated in the judgment of the lower court, contrary to the circumstance indicated in its reasoning, and thus, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The point of unfair sentencing

The punishment sentenced by the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Judgment on misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles

In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant administered a phiphone at the time and place as stated in paragraph (1) of the court below's decision as stated in the court below's decision, and there is no evidence to suspect that the defendant was subjected to a "balon mulberry" from non-indicted 2 due to the circumstance as alleged in the court below's decision, and this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. Determination on the assertion of unfair sentencing

However, even though the defendant had had the record of punishing the defendant on several occasions prior to the crime of this case, he again committed the violation of the Psychotropic Drugs Control Act, and the violation of the Psychotropic Drugs Control Act, etc., the defendant again committed the violation of the Psychotropic Drugs Control Act of the same kind. In particular, on January 2009, the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment on two years and six months for the crime of attempted murder on January 20, 2009, and was released from the above sentence on February 19, 2011 and committed each of the crimes of this case during the period of repeated crimes without being aware of the record of the completion of the execution of the above sentence, and each of the crimes of this case committed by the defendant was destroyed by walking the entrance entrance of the detention room during the process of investigating the crime of Philon medication. The reason, contents, means and result of the crime, degree of damage, etc. In light of the situation and nature of the crime, the defendant's age, occupation, family relation after the crime of this case, the defendant's health condition of this case, etc.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Ho-ho (Presiding Judge)