A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

1,300,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

Punishment of the crime

[Attachment] On November 10, 201, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for a violation of the Narcotics Control Act at the Seoul Central District Court on September 17, 201, and completed the execution of the said sentence.

[2015 Highest 2701] Even if the Defendant is not a narcotics handler, he dealt with the psychotropic drugs, so as to deal with the psychotropic drugs, the following:

1. Around 19:00 on June 10, 2013, the Defendant sold phiphonephones to C by receiving KRW 600,000 from C in the way near Bupyeong-gu Incheon Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, and giving approximately 0.8g of philophones.

2. On June 16, 2013, around 16:30, the Defendant sold a phiphone to C by receiving KRW 600,000 from C at the “F” coffee shop located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D, and giving phiphone 0.8g of phiphones.

3. On April 2015, the Defendant, in addition to the I’s statement known to him from “H” located in Geumcheon-gu Seoul, Geumcheon-gu, Seoul, there is no other evidence to specify that the Defendant is “I”, in addition to the Defendant’s statement.

A total of approximately 0.05 g of philophones in dialphones and administered them by means of inserting them into a injection machine, melting them with water, and injecting them into the following arms.

[2015 Height399] On April 23, 2015, the Defendant: (a) cut off the victim’s property by making a fluoring the victim’s property by setting up a fluoring the fluor’s property, following the 50,000 won of the market price, which is equivalent to the 700,000 won of the market price, 1 female fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoring in front of Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government J on the left hand; (b) the 700,000 won of the market price; (c) the 410,000 won of cash; and (d) the verification plastic fluoral flu

Summary of Evidence

[2015 Highest 2701]

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The Defendant of the witness C’s legal statement asserts that C has made a false statement from the investigative agency to this court. However, the witness C’s legal statement is specific, consistent, and is based on the Defendant’s attitude and attitude.