(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.07.13 2015고단2895

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) 서울남부지방법원 2016.07.13 2015고단2895

마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

80,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant is not a narcotics handler.

On December 14, 2014, the Defendant sold to E approximately KRW 1.5g of the Mepta, a local mental medicine, for approximately KRW 80,000,000,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Part of the protocol (including the cross-examination of the accused) concerning the examination of the suspect by the prosecution against the accused;

1. Statement made by the prosecution against E;

1. Recording recording recording and reporting;

1. Report of investigation (Attachment of photographs of the latest telephone record of the suspect's mobile phone), and mobile phone pictures;

1. An appraisal statement (E is consistent in an investigative agency and this court and has consistently purchased phiphones from the Defendant in the vicinity of the exit 12 back to the police station of the D Line on December 2, 2014;

The statements are made, and the contents of the statements are very detailed.

Although the E’s statement in this court is somewhat unclear about the date of purchasing phiphones, it can be seen as a natural sponsing phenomenon, which is rather from the limit of memory due to the passage of time.

The Defendant was arrested on the spot, on March 18, 2015, who called “F” after receiving and consenting to the phone call from E, called “F,” called “F,” and asked to request the phone-phone, and went to the place of transaction which was promised on March 18, 2015.

E refers to the following: (a) the Defendant and the Defendant made telephone conversations on the same day; and (b) the Defendant made a reply to the effect that they are admitted.

The above facts suggest that the defendant had sold philophones to E before, and support the credibility of the E's above statement.

At the time, the defendant's defense counsel impeachments the credibility of the E's statement on the basis of the location of the base station on the sending of the mobile phone used by the defendant and E, but rather, the mobile phone (G) and E used by the defendant at the time.

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2018.05.25 2018노421

-대구지방법원 2014.11.07 2014노329

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.06.21 2018노1101

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.01.11 2017고단8009

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.05.19 2015고단8311