logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2013.04.04 2012노2444
마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is to set the period of medication by including the period thereof, based on the result of appraisal of the defendant's maternity, and the place was also set as a day within the Jin-si in accordance with the monetary content of the defendant, but the court below dismissed the public prosecution on the grounds that the procedure for the institution of public prosecution is null and void in violation of the provisions of Acts, since the facts charged in this case are not specified. The court below erred

2. The purport of Article 254(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which states, “The facts charged shall be stated clearly by specifying the time, date, place, and method of a crime.” The purpose of Article 254(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act is to ensure the efficiency and prompt trial by limiting the object of the trial, and at the same time to facilitate the exercise of defense by specifying the scope of defense and facilitate the exercise of defense by the defendant. As such, the prosecutor, as a prosecutor, must comprehensively consider the three specific elements, describe specific facts that constitute the elements of a crime so as to distinguish facts from other facts. The same applies to the statement on the facts charged of a violation of the Act on the Control

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Do7422 Decided January 11, 2007, etc.). In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that “the Defendant is not a person handling narcotics, but the Defendant administered the instant facts charged once in a manner of injection or drinking of the Mesamina 0.03g from the day during the period from June 6, 201 to July 29, 201 by using a disposable injection device during the period from June 6, 2011 to July 29, 201.” Accordingly, the foregoing statement on the period of medication of the Mesa camba cam is likely to hinder the Defendant’s exercise of right to defense, and is deemed to be in light of the characteristics of the narcotics crime repeated within the short period.

arrow