(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.09.27 2016노263 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.09.27 2016노263

마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)

Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant asserts to the effect that there is no enemy who administered a mert cryptopy.

B. The lower court’s punishment (two months of imprisonment, additional collection) is too uneasy and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly admitted and examined at the court below as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant may recognize the fact that the Defendant administered the Mept Mept as stated in the facts constituting a crime in the judgment below.

1) During the process of consistently exchanging the Defendant with the investigative agency from the investigative agency to this court, E (a person who is an informant) had received the Defendant’s request from the Defendant to deliver it to the Defendant who was on board the Kaman-type car, and had the Defendant administered the merptist within the said vehicle.

In addition to the statement, there is no special circumstance to suspect the credibility of the statement, such as the confirmation, etc. of the contents of telephone conversations with E on February 2, 2014, according to E's statement.

The Defendant asserts that there is no credibility on the E’s statement that the Defendant was taking a vehicle on board and administered a merptist within the vehicle. However, the Defendant appears to have been aware that he was driving while driving the vehicle on a normal basis with the knowledge of his intention to drive the vehicle, such as being subject to the revocation of the Class II driver’s license in 2003 and the Class I driver’s license in 2010, and cannot be deemed to have been credibility on the E’s statement solely based on the above assertion by the Defendant.

2) According to the written appraisal prepared by the National Institute of Scientific Investigation, it appears that the response to the training of Meptists is shown in the Defendant’s hair at the length of 3 to 8cm collected on May 22, 2014.

On May 2014, the defendant argues that the reaction of training is generated because he administered a Mept Meet Memnas in the middle of 2014.

유사 판례

-춘천지방법원 2018.01.17 2017노468

-대법원 2018.02.08 2017도14222

-광주지방법원 장흥지원 2018.02.08 2017고단231

-전주지방법원 2018.10.11 2018고단807

-서울동부지방법원 2017.06.21 2016고단4341