Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and six months.

10,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

Punishment of the crime

Notwithstanding that the Defendant is not a narcotics handler, from October 16, 2017, the facts charged in the instant case from around October 11, 2017, indicated as “from around October 11, 2017,” but according to the attached paper Nos. 12 B and attached by the prosecutor, it is reasonable to deem “from around October 16, 2017,” and the scope of “from around October 16, 2017,” and even if the facts are recognized without any changes in the indictment, it does not seem to hinder the Defendant’s exercise of right to defense.

From October 20, 2017 to October 20, a day between D Hospital located in Seo-gu Busan Metropolitan City, administered phiphonephones by means of drinking drinking water, such as the Metepopic (one philopopon; hereinafter “philopon”). The Melopon administered a Melopon, which is a local mental medicine, in the vicinity of D Hospital located in Seo-gu Busan Metropolitan City.

[In relation to this, the defendant/defense counsel: ① the defendant has not administered philophones during the above period without being found guilty; ② even if the philophones were administered in anywhere, the philophones were administered.

Even if assumed, the facts charged are specified

It is difficult to see that public prosecution should be dismissed.

(1) If there is a reply to a request from the head of the National Institute of Scientific Investigation to make an appraisal on the part of the defendant in the case of violation of the Narcotics Control Act, unless there are specific circumstances such as the change of the base of the reply, or the mistake or error, etc., in the appraisal which forms the basis of the reply, it shall be recognized that the Mesphere composition was detected on the part of the defendant. Accordingly, in accordance with the rules of logic and experience, the defendant has been administered Mesphere in the Mesphere before collecting the Mesphere which is the object of appraisal.

It must be recognized (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do10937, Feb. 14, 2008). However, the following evidence adopted and examined by this court, among the evidence adopted and examined by this court, the defendant's defense against Mesafin.