A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Seized evidence No. 1 shall be confiscated.

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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, at the Cheongju District Court on May 15, 2014, sentenced one year to imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc., and was not a person who completed the enforcement of the sentence on February 4, 2015, and was not a person handling narcotics.

On March 26, 2015, the Defendant administered a psychotropic drug dose using a one-time injection device at the Domotocel located in the Cheongju-si considerable area of Cheongju-si, in a way that the Defendant injecteds the psychotropic drug by using a single-time injection device.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each prosecutor's protocol of examination of the accused;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Records of seizure by prosecution;

1. Requests for each appraisal;

1. A report on investigation (to be accompanied by the currency details), and March 2015;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: To apply investigation reports (Attachment of written judgments), investigation reports (verification of the expiration of the term of punishment of a suspect, and probation office procedures);

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

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

1. The main sentence of Article 67 of the Act on the Management of Confiscated Narcotics;

1. Whether to recognize the proviso to Article 67 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. subject to Additional Collection (the nationwide average trading price per penphone on March 2015), intentionally;

1. The Defendant alleged that he was using a disposable injection device, and then examined the injection device, citing suspicions as to whether he had administered phiphones or not, immediately after he was injecting a non-cognon concentration.

After confirming the white shot body, the Defendant recognized that the substance required for a single-use shotphone is a shotphone.

(1) On February 2, 188 of the Investigation Records) The defendant, upon detection of philophones from the Defendant’s urine, found in the following circumstances, namely, ① the time and circumstances of checking substances inside a single-use divers, which are known by the aforementioned evidence.