Defendant

Jindo-Appellee (prosecution), Park Jae-hun, and South Korean Government (Public trial)

Law Firm Han-ro, Attorney Kim Jong-ho

1. The punishment of the accused shall be three years;

2. The evidence seized shall be confiscated from the defendant;

3. 20,000 won shall be collected from the defendant.

【Criminal Power】

On October 25, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for three years and six months for a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. at the Daegu District Court on October 25, 2013, and completed the execution of the sentence in the original prison on October 11, 2015.

【Criminal Facts】

1. Violation of the Narcotics Control Act;

Defendant is not a narcotics handler.

A. On April 2016, the Defendant administered a medication using an injection device, which was located at the Seocho-dong ( Address 2 omitted) on April 2016, by using an injection device, such as △△△ apartment, △△△ apartment, dedicated to dedicated to dedicated to dedicateds, dedicated to dedicateds, dedicated to dedicateds, and psychotropic drugs.

B. From Jun. 15, 2016 to Jun. 21, 2016, the Defendant administered the amount of ○○○○○○○○○○, located at the Dong-dong ( Address 1 omitted) in a △△dong-dong, and the amount of mert clap’s fire in an irregular manner.

C. On June 21, 2016, at around 20:00, the Defendant kept approximately 0.06gg of the mert ambamins inside the key of the vehicle (vehicle registration number 1 omitted) operated by the Defendant at the place indicated in paragraph (2) on June 21, 2016, and stored approximately 0.06g of the mert ambamins inside the key bags of the vehicle.

2. Larceny;

A. On June 1, 2016, from around 15:00 to around 11:00 of the same month, the Defendant cut off agricultural bank deposit passbooks (Account Number omitted) in the name of the victim Nonindicted 3, who was parked in front of the above ○○○○○○○○○○, (vehicle No. 2 omitted) in the string floor set of the string floor of the string Cridge, and stolen.

B. At around 11:56 on June 2, 2016, the Defendant: (a) removed KRW 6 million in total on six occasions as indicated in the attached list of crimes, including: (b) inserted the said Nonindicted 3’s agricultural cooperative deposit passbook, which was stolen in advance, in a cash automatic withdrawal machine; and (c) withdrawn KRW 1 million in cash by entering the password.

3. Obstruction of performance of official duties, injury;

At around 15:25 on June 21, 2016, Non-Indicted 1 and Non-Indicted 2 belonging to the Gyeongbuk Provincial Police Agency criminal and narcotics investigation group asked Non-Indicted 1's left hand hand son, Non-Indicted 1's second hand son, Non-Indicted 1's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's right-hand hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand son's second hand.

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Part of each prosecutor's protocol of examination of the defendant

1. Each legal statement of the witness, Nonindicted 3, Nonindicted 1, and Nonindicted 2

1. Each police statement against Nonindicted 3

1. Each written statement of Nonindicted 1 and Nonindicted 2

1. Request for the submission of reports on domestic accidents, replies, request for business cooperation, copy of the results of simple test of reagents, collection of hairs, requests for appraisal, reports on the results of preliminary tests on narcotics, certificates of delivery of emotional items, requests for appraisal, and requests for analysis of digital evidence;

1. Each protocol of seizure, each list of seizure, and submission at will;

1. Each internal investigation report and accompanying materials;

1. Each investigation report and accompanying materials;

1. Criminal records in holding: Criminal records, etc. inquiry reports, internal investigation reports (referring to specific vehicles, etc. of suspects), accompanying materials, investigation reports (report on suspect's previous records and recorded letters of decisions), and accompanying materials;

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 60(1)2, Article 4(1)1, and Article 2 subparag. 3(b) of the Narcotics Control Act

○ Possession of meta-pams: Article 60(1)2, Article 4(1)1, and Article 2 subparag. 3(b) of the Narcotics Control Act

○ Each larceny: Article 329 of the Criminal Act

○ Each obstruction of performance of official duties: Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act

○ Each injury: Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Commercial competition;

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (Mutual Crimes of Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties and of Bodily Injury)

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

Article 35 of the Criminal Act

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Confiscation;

Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act

1. Additional collection:

Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act

The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the facts charged as to the part A. B. of the judgment of the court below were not specified, and that each of the facts charged of this case was not administered and possessed with respect to the crime of medication and possession, and that each of the larceny was withdrawn with the passbook of the victim as stated in the facts charged, but with respect to the crime of larceny, the defendant and his defense counsel did not withdraw money with the victim's passbook as to the crime of larceny. However, prior to the withdrawal, the victim obtained a comprehensive consent for use of the above money, and there was no intention to obtain unjust enrichment, and each of the obstruction of performance of official duties and the crime of bodily injury was exercised by the defendant against the non-indicted 1 and the non-indicted 2 at the time of the entry in the facts charged, but they asserted

However, in light of the aforementioned evidence, it is difficult to see that the specified degree of the facts charged in the judgment No. 1-A-B is impeding the defendant's exercise of his right to defense, and in the case of each part of the crime of medication and possession, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant voluntarily withdrawn from the charges with his intent to obtain unlawful acquisition without the victim's consent, and in the case of each part of the crime of larceny, it can be recognized that the defendant committed the act of violence as described in the facts charged, and in the case of each obstruction of performance of official duties and the crime of bodily injury, it can be recognized that the defendant committed the act of the defendant as described in the facts charged, and that such act of the defendant cannot be viewed as self-defense.

Therefore, the above arguments by the defendant and the defense counsel cannot be accepted for all reasons.

1. Recommendations based on the sentencing criteria;

(a) Crimes of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc.;

(i) Determinations of each type: Narcotics, medication, simple possession, etc., Type 3 (f) (b) and (c).

(b) Each special person: A previous conviction for the same kind of crime;

3) Determination of each recommended territory: Aggravation;

4) Scope of each recommendation: Imprisonment with prison labor for up to three years;

(b) Theft;

(i) Determination of each type: thief, theft for general property, theft for two types (general larceny);

(ii) Determination of each recommended territory: Basic territory;

3) Scope of each recommendation: Imprisonment with labor for up to six months up to one year and six months;

(c) Final recommendations based on the standards for handling multiple crimes;

At least one year of imprisonment (at least the lowest standard shall apply to concurrent concurrent crimes, as seen earlier, which are not subject to the sentencing guidelines).

2. Determination of sentence;

In light of the circumstances, method, etc., each crime of this case is heavy. The Defendant has a majority of the criminal records (the majority of the punishment force related to psychotropic drugs, majority of the punishment power, and majority of the punishment power). Nevertheless, each crime of this case during the period of repeated crime as indicated in its reasoning, as well as the investigative agency, has reached an urgent attitude to avoid its responsibility. Furthermore, the Defendant, as well as the criminal investigation agency, shows an urgent attitude to avoid its responsibility. As can be seen, it is deemed necessary to actively correct the Defendant in a state of isolation from society for a considerable period of time with respect to the Defendant who has no reflectability against the mistake. In addition, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after the crime, etc., and the Defendant

[Attachment]

Judges Kim Dong-dong