beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals filed by the Defendants B and prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. According to the prosecutor 1) misunderstanding the facts (including the part not guilty (including the part not guilty of the reasoning) of the judgment of the court below, according to each of the statements from the investigation agency of Defendant A to the court below, and the details of Defendant A’s propool withdrawal, each of the facts charged of this case against Defendant A and B should be found guilty.
Nevertheless, the court below found the above Defendants not guilty of the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. listed in the attached Schedules (3) and (4) of the judgment of the court below (the above Defendants not guilty of the crimes listed in (3) and (4) 2 through 7, 10, 12, 13, 15, 17, 19, 22, 27 through 29, 31 through 36, and the judgment of the court below is erroneous, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts.
2) Each sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants (Defendant A: the penalty of KRW 41,453,776 on the observation of the protection of two-year suspended sentence for one year of imprisonment; the penalty of KRW 41,610,00 in the penalty of KRW 41,610 in the sentence of one year and six months; and the penalty of KRW 5 million in the case of Defendant C) is too unfford and unreasonable.
B. Defendant B’s punishment sentenced to the above Defendant is too unreasonable.
2. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding the facts [the part of the judgment of the court below which acquitted (including the acquittal of the reasons)]
A. This part of the facts charged 1) Defendant A is not a narcotics handler.
On May 30, 2017, the Defendant, at around 12:23, around 12:23, 2017, administered propool for a total of KRW 53,620,00 (excluding the remainder of KRW 2,00,00, which was found guilty among the charges 3.850,000) for the purpose of administering propool, which is located in the fifth fifth floor of the Gangnam-gu Seoul International Building, and administered propool for a total of KRW 53,620,00,00 for the purpose other than medical treatment as shown in the attached Table (3), including the administration of propool, until December 13, 2017.
2) Defendant B’s Defendant 5 in Gangnam-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City I building “J sexually in the fifth floor.”