logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2012.11.29 2012고단1645
유해화학물질관리법위반(환각물질흡입)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[2012 Godan1645] The Defendant, around 14:00 on July 17, 2012, set up his own vehicle in front of Yongsan-gu Seoul, Yongsan-gu, Seoul, and inhaled it by means of inserting the Toluene, which is a liquid substance, into a transparent fluorial package and exposing it at the entrance of the enclosed.

[2012 Highest 1674] around 19:0 on July 19, 2012, the Defendant inhaled the 62-ro ice-ro, Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, in a prone forest to the northwest of the Drown River, in a transparent vinyl with Toluene, which is a liquid substance, into a fake and into the entrance of the sealed paper.

Summary of Evidence

[2012 Highest 1645]

1. Statement made by the defendant in this court;

1. Seizure records;

1. Photographs of seized articles (2012 highest 1674);

1. Statement made by the defendant in this court;

1. Requests for appraisal;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 58 of the relevant Act and Article 43 (1) of the Toxic Chemicals Control Act concerning facts constituting an offense and Article 58 of the select of punishment;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Probation under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act for the crime of violation of the Toxic Chemicals Control Act is that the defendant committed the instant crime even though he/she had been sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on July 13, 2007 and a fine of two million won on November 6, 2008, which was sentenced to punishment on July 13, 2007. However, although the defendant committed the instant crime in spite of the fact that he/she committed the instant crime under the circumstances where he/she was faced with economic difficulties due to unemployment, he/she appears to have committed the instant crime under the circumstances where he/she was in financial difficulties due to unemployment, and is currently against his/her mistake and is able to lead a life in good faith.

arrow