beta
Text
The judgment below
Of the above, the part of collection against Defendant B shall be reversed.
Defendant
180,000 won shall be collected from B.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (Defendant A: imprisonment with prison labor for one year, additional collection for 2.90,000 won) is too unreasonable.
B. Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding the legal principles as to the collection of additional charges against Defendant B is unfair since the lower court’s collection of additional charges of KRW 1.20,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,0000,000,000,000
2. As to the prosecutor’s assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles on the collection of additional charges, Defendant B conspired with the joint Defendant A to administer three posters (MMA) in a total of three times, and Defendant B received free of charge the amount of KRW 180,000 for Defendant B (=60,000 for each transaction price per each time at Lusster) (i.e., KRW 60,000,000 for each Defendant B administered in early July 2019.
However, it is reasonable to see that Defendant A purchased the liquid posters from the E of the same month as KRW 60,00 (Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act) (Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act provides for a crime as provided in this Act, and the profits therefrom shall be confiscated.
Provided, That if it is impossible to confiscate it, the value thereof shall be collected additionally.
Article 67 of the above Act provides that "The value of the narcotics, etc. which cannot be confiscated as long as they fall under the proviso of Article 67 of the above Act shall be collected as necessary, and the value of the narcotics, etc. to be collected as a penalty refers to the ordinary transaction price in the market, and if the ordinary transaction price is not formed, it shall be based on the actual transaction price (Supreme Court Decision 83Do1927 delivered on September 13, 1983) x 3) x 120,000 won shall be collected as necessary, but the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the calculation of the amount of penalty.