The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

seizure.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal by the defendant is too heavy to the court below's punishment, and the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor are too minor to the court below's punishment.

2. Ex officio determination

A. The main sentence of Article 67 of the Act on the Management of Narcotics, Etc., which has failed to make a declaration of forfeiture, provides that “narcotics, temporary narcotics, and facilities, equipment, funds, or means of transport provided for any crime as provided for in this Act, and the proceeds therefrom shall be confiscated,” so long as such requirements are satisfied, the court shall,

According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, subparagraphs 1 and 2 of this Article, which are narcotics, etc. provided by the investigation agency to the crime as indicated in the judgment below, can be acknowledged as having the fact that they are Metepha (the word "philopon"; hereinafter referred to as "philopon") and YABA containing philopon (the above seized articles are subject to necessary confiscation pursuant to the main sentence of Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on forfeiture of the main sentence of Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Of the judgment of the court below which sentenced confiscation or collection in the scope of reversal, where there are reasons for reversal only concerning the part of confiscation or collection, that part may be reversed. However, where the court below reversed on the grounds that the court below did not pronounced confiscation or collection, it cannot be reversed on the ground that there was no part of confiscation or collection in the judgment of the court below, and therefore, the part

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Do5822 Decided October 28, 2005, etc.). Therefore, even in this case where the lower court did not sentence confiscation, the entire part of the lower judgment against the Defendant should be reversed.

3. The above grounds for ex officio reversal are without examining the Defendant and the prosecutor’s allegation of unfair sentencing.