logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2018.11.15 2018노3377
마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Although the defendant could fully recognize the fact that he administered philophones as stated in the facts charged in this case, the court below acquitted the defendant. The court below erred in the misapprehension of facts.

2. Determination

A. On July 2014, the summary of the facts charged in the instant case was inserted about 0.03g of the Memopon, which is a local mental medicine, into a single-use injection machine, and dilution with a meopon, at the inside of the Defendant’s residence in the Busan Jin-gu Busan, Busan, the Defendant administered the meopon in a way of injection into his arms and meopon.

B. The lower court acquitted the Defendant of the instant facts charged on the following grounds.

1) The Defendant asserts that, from January 10, 2014 to April 14, 2015, he/she was arrested for committing a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc., he/she administered philophones twice (on September 25, 2014 and May 14, 2015) between the two times (on May 25, 2014) and the two times (on May 25, 2015). The Defendant asserted that the philophones have not been administered on the date stated in the facts charged.

2) At the investigation stage, the Defendant led to the confession of the facts charged in the instant case, and as evidence of reinforcement thereof, reported the detection of the Defendant’s DNA in a single-use plastic injection instrument from which the Defendant’s DNA was detected (Evidence List 1, 3, 4, 5, 7).

However, solely on the fact that the Defendant’s DNA was detected at plastic injection machines, the Defendant administered phiphones on the date and time stated in the facts charged to “Singman of early July 2014.”

It is difficult to conclude otherwise, and there is no evidence to reinforce the confession to the investigation agency of the defendant.

(c)

The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the first instance court, are as follows.

arrow