The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

8,445,600 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant asserted the misapprehension of the legal principles as to additional collection in collusion with C, purchased 5 g of phiphones as stated in paragraphs (1) and (2) of the facts charged in the instant case, and acquired 2.5 g of 2.5 g of phiphones among them, but the lower court erred by calculating the amount of additional collection against the Defendant on the premise that the Defendant acquired

B. The lower court’s imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) on the ground of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding the legal principles on additional collection, confiscation or additional collection under Article 67 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. is not aimed at deprivation of benefits from criminal acts, but rather a disposition of punitive nature, so there was no benefit from such crime.

The court shall order the additional collection of the value, and if there are many persons who have committed the crime with respect to the scope of such additional collection, the court shall order each person to collect the total amount of psychotropic drugs within the scope he/she handles.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Do5158 Decided December 28, 2001, etc.). The crime of paragraphs (1) and (2) of the facts charged in the instant case is that “the Defendant conspired with C to share one-half of the expenses, and purchased five gramphones from D and G two times each time from D and G,” and the lower court calculated the amount of the Defendant by applying the nationwide average retail price perphones per unit (10g (10g - 0.82g) to each five g of the instant criminal act. In so doing, the lower court assessed the amount of the Defendant on the basis of 9.18g (i.e., 10g - 0.82g) other than the gramphones confiscated by C, an accomplice, by applying the total nationwide retail price per gram.

In light of the above legal principles, as long as the Defendant and C are the co-principal of the crime of purchasing phiphones, the scope of phiphones handled by the Defendant and C in collusion with each other shall be deemed to be the total of 10 g of phiphones purchased. The Defendant and C shall purchase 1/2 of phiphones.