Whether the crime of attempted manufacture of psychotropic drugs is established, even if the psychotropic ingredient is not detected in an unsatisfyed finished product due to a lack of manufacturing technology (affirmative)

If he/she has recruited to produce mulberry, and attempted to manufacture mulberry by using a chemical medicine for species such as salt acid and pagody, and he/she used as a raw material for manufacturing it, but failed to manufacture he/she promptly, due to a lack of manufacturing technology, he/she cannot be deemed as having received a complaint in the establishment of a crime of attempted manufacture of psychotropic drugs, even though he/she did not detect it from an unsatisfying product, even if he/she failed to manufacture it.

Article 25 of the Criminal Act, Articles 3, 4, 41, and 42 of the Psychotropic Drugs Control Act

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Seo-sik,

Daegu High Court Decision 84No475 delivered on June 29, 1984

The appeal is dismissed.

The forty-five days, from among days of detention pending trial after the appeal, shall be included in the principal sentence.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant and his defense counsel are also examined.

Although examining the evidence presented by the court of first instance by comparing and examining the records, the court below's finding the facts of each crime as to the defendant's judgment is just, and there is no evidence to find that the suspect examination of the defendant prepared by the prosecutor, etc., without credibility as adviser, etc., was in violation of the rules of evidence such as theory in the process of evidence collection. In addition, since the defendant was manufactured or attempted to manufacture, he was the name of the "Mempis" as the name of the "Mempis", which constitutes No. 2 of the attached Table 2 of Article 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Psychotropic Drugs Control Act, and thus, the court below did not find the defendant's attempt to use the article as a drug of this case and did not constitute a psychotropic drug, and it cannot be said that the defendant's attempted to use the article of this case, which is a manufacturing raw material of this case, and it cannot be said that the defendant's attempted to use the article of this case as an attempt to use the article of this case.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges by applying Article 57 of the Criminal Act and Article 24 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings to the inclusion of detention days after the appeal.

Justices Kim Jong-sik (Presiding Justice)