No. 1 of the judgment of the defendant

(a)in respect of crimes, crimes, 2-A. Crimes, imprisonment with prison labor for not more than six months, as indicated in Decision 1-C;

crime, 2-2.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal records] On May 9, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to a three-year suspended sentence due to a violation of the Narcotics Control Act in the Incheon District Court’s Branch Branch, etc. on the following grounds: (a) on December 15, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to a three-year suspended sentence; and (b) on December 15, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence to a three-year suspended sentence (five-year suspended sentence to a three-year suspended sentence); (c) on the instant indictment, the Defendant was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence for a six-month suspended sentence. However, since it is obvious that the Defendant is a clerical error,

On December 23, 2016, the judgment became final and conclusive.

[2] The Defendant, who is not a person dealing with narcotics, is not a person dealing with narcotics, is not a person dealing with narcotics, and the Defendant is not a person dealing with clickphones (one philophones, hereinafter “philophones”). However, the Defendant dealt with philophones as follows.

1. Purchasing philophones;

A. Above August 8, 2016

9. The Defendant: (a) around August 8, 2016 to September 9, 2016, on the low-speed page of the Defendant’s driving parked on a road located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government New-ro-dong; (b) provided D with cash of KRW 600,00,000; and (c) purchased a one-time injection device containing approximately 0.7g of phiphones.

B. On August 13, 2016, around 22:00 on August 13, 2016, the Defendant purchased a philopon by taking one disposable injection machine with cash KRW 600,000 and approximately 0.7 g of philopon, in the low-speed vehicle parked in the near Fam in Gyeyang-gu Incheon Gyeyang-gu, Incheon.

(c)

After December 23, 2016, to the extent that it does not disadvantage the defendant's exercise of his/her right to defense, part of the written indictment of this case shall be corrected according to the results obtained from the examination of evidence in this court without any procedures for amendment of indictment, to the extent that it does not disadvantage the defendant's exercise of right to defense

(hereinafter the same shall apply)

In the instant indictment, the Defendant was “Crimes from the end of December 2016 to the beginning of January 2017,” but the Defendant was “1.c.,” in this court.

The crime under subsection (1) was stated to the effect that the crime was committed after December 23, 2016 (the third trial date).