A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

Even if the Defendant is not a person handling narcotics, the Defendant administered and possessed psychotropic drugs-related Mesofts (one philophone, hereinafter referred to as “philophones”), as follows:

1. At around 02:00 on August 25, 2016, the Defendant administered camon medication by means of dilution of approximately 0.1g opon into the Defendant’s arms blood transfusion using a single-use injection device, within the Dramb vehicle owned by the Defendant, parked in the camnicom parking lot located in Dao-si B.

2. At around 12:25 on September 7, 2016, the Defendant possessed a phiphone by storing 1.35g philopon and 0.09g philopon on a disposable plastic plastic bag, which was used by the Defendant, in the third floor of the building E, on the third floor of the building.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The statement of each police officer made to F and G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each protocol of seizure and each list of seizure;

1. Article 60 (1) 2, Article 4 (1) 1, and subparagraph 3 (b) of Article 2 of the Act on the Management of Narcotics, etc., concerning the relevant criminal facts and the Selection of Punishment;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Grounds for sentencing under the proviso to Article 67 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc.;

1. Scope of recommendations according to the sentencing criteria;

(a) Type 3 (Wing-2 (b) and (c) of the Basic Area (10-2) (10-2 years) of the First Crimes (the scope of recommendations), medication, simple possession, etc.;

(b) Type 3 of the basic area (10 to 2 years) (10 to 2 years) of the second crime (the scope of recommendation), medication, simple possession, etc.;

(c) The scope of final sentence due to the aggravation of multiple offenses: Ten months to three years; and

2. The decision of sentencing is against the defendant's wrong recognition of his or her own mistake and does not have the same kind of criminal record.

However, the crime of this case is not limited to the administration of philophones, but is possessed by the defendant in order to sell philophones, and the responsibility for the crime of this case is not weak.

In addition, the defendant.