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 a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On August 23, 2015, the Defendant: (a) received approximately 0.1g of a single-use popon, which is a local mental medicine, from C, using a single-use popon, and administered part of approximately 0.1g of the above 0.1g of the copon to the Defendant’s arms at around August 23, 2015, using a single-use popon.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Copy of protocol concerning the examination of suspect C by the police; and

1. A statement on narcotics appraisal;

1. Investigation report (related to response to an appraisal by the National Institute of Scientific Investigation);

1. A criminal report (calculated of a surcharge) and the price of cancer narcotics;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of seized articles;

1. Article 60 (1) 2, Article 4 (1) and subparagraph 3 (b) of Article 2 of the Act on the Selection and Management of Narcotics, Etc. for Criminal Facts and Article 60 (1) 3 of the Act on the Selection and Management of Specific Drugs, Etc.;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Orders to observe protection and attend lectures under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. Reasons for sentencing under the proviso of Article 67 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. [the scope of the recommended punishment] Medication, mere possession, etc. of the types of three types (six months to one year and six months) in the mitigation area (six months to one year and six months) [the person subject to special mitigation] [the decision of sentence]] Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for a year and six months in the Gwangju District Court on December 23, 2009 due to a crime of violation of the Narcotics Control Act in the area of mitigation (the act of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. at the Gwangju District Court on December 23, 2009; however, there was no previous conviction due to the administration of a phiphonephone; the Defendant was in injection by using the one-time injection machine, and the Defendant suspended the administration again.

The defendant's assertion is persuasive in light of the fact that the reaction of philophone training was found in the 1st injection device and the defendant's DNA was detected, but the defendant's urine and the urine of the defendant showed philophone voice reaction in the urine and the urine of the defendant.

The fact that the defendant appears, the fact that the defendant actively cooperates in the investigation of drug offenders, and other matters.