Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for ten months.

Provided, That each of the above punishments shall be executed for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

Defendants are not authorized to handle narcotics.

1. Defendant A

A. On September 201, 201, the Defendant purchased approximately 0.1g of psychotropic drugs from F, Mespoptypists (one-time penphone; hereinafter referred to as “oponphone”) within a flus car operated by the Defendant, who was parked on the road in front of the Dobong-gu Seoul Elementary School, Seoul, for about 100,000 won.

B. At around 20:00 on July 26, 2012, the Defendant purchased approximately 0.1g 0.1g of philopon from F in the vicinity of the Defendant’s office located in Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, for about 100,000 won.

2. Defendant B

A. The Defendant purchased approximately 0.1g of philopon from F at the same time and place as paragraph 1(a) in 100,000 won.

B. At around 11:30 on July 27, 2012, the Defendant purchased approximately 0.1g of philopon from F from the Defendant’s office located in Cheongju-si, U.S. to KRW 100,000.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement made to F and I by the prosecution;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

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, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act for a suspended sentence (hereinafter referred to as the following grounds for sentencing);

1. Probation under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. The proviso to Article 67 of the Act on the Management of Narcotics, etc. for Additional Collection;

1. In addition, even though the Defendants had been punished for the same kind of crime under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Defendants committed the instant crime, considering the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendants, the number of the Defendants’ crimes and the quantity of the Mestopians purchased, the Defendants did not have much amount of the number of crimes, and the fact that the Defendants were previous and long-term crimes, the sentence of suspended execution shall be imposed on the Defendants.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.