logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.05.20 2015노6251
마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
Text

All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and four months.

2,030,000 won from the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the facts of the crime No. 2-C as indicated in the judgment of the court below 1, the Defendant did not administer philophones.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (an additional collection of KRW 1 year and March, 300,000) is too unreasonable.

B. As to the facts of the crime No. 1-A of the judgment of the court below in the second instance as to the facts of the judgment of the court below, the defendant did not receive KRW 50,000 from J without compensation, and as to the crime No. 1-B, the defendant merely purchased and divided the J and the Handphones, and did not sell the Handphones to J. In relation to the crime No. 2-B, the defendant did not receive KRW 200,000,000,000,000,000 won, and the defendant purchased, sold P and the Handphones to P as to the crime No. 3-A, B, and C, and the defendant did not sell the Hands to P.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (an additional collection of KRW 1,66,730,00,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination, the defendant filed each appeal against the above judgment of the court below and decided to hold concurrent trials. Each of the offenses of the court below Nos. 1 and 2 against the defendant is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and one of the concurrent crimes is to be sentenced within the scope of punishment imposed under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding the facts is still subject to the judgment of the court, and this is considered.

3. In full view of the Defendant’s legal statement and prosecutor’s statement, D’s prosecutor’s statement, etc. as to the assertion of mistake of the facts concerning the judgment of the court of first instance, the Defendant administered phiphones as stated in Article 2-3 of the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below.

arrow