A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.

Of seized Cocars 644.9g (Evidence 1), Cocars 654.67g (Evidence 2).

Criminal facts

On March 21, 2018, the Defendant: (a) received and carried in a package of approximately 1,299.57g of this vinyl, cocar, a drug, from the volume of narcotics supplied; (b) received and carried in a package of this vinyl, which was sealed on both sides of the inside and outside of the bank; (c) was on board at the airport of Maul on March 22, 2018 (on-site view) 01:15 (on March 22, 2018, on the following day; (d) was transferred to B at the airport of Maula; and (e) was transferred to the airport of Maul on March 10:00 (on-site view) in the U.S. on March 23, 2018; and (e) arrived at the airport of Maul in Incheon, Incheon on March 24, 2018.

Accordingly, even if the Defendant is not a narcotics handler, the Defendant imported approximately 1,299.57g, a cocar, who is a narcotics, in collusion with the above-mentioned person under his name, from Brazil to the Republic of Korea.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A report on detection of the Incheon Airport Customs Office;

1. A protocol of seizure (cocar, etc.);

1. Each investigation report (the sequence 17, 18, 25, 26, 29, 32 of the evidence list);

1. Written response to the results of the analysis;

1. Response to a request for appraisal;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on narcotics appraisal;

1. Article 58 (1) 1, Article 4 (1) 1, and Article 2 subparagraph 2 (d) of the Act on the Selection of Narcotics, Etc. concerning the crime, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, and Article 58 (1) 2 of the Act on the Management of Narcotics, Etc., and Selection of Imprisonment with prison labor for abandonment;

1. Claims by the accused and defense counsel under the main sentence of Article 67 of the Act on the Management of Confiscated Narcotics;

1. The summary of the assertion was that the Defendant had the intention to import cocars, since the Defendant entered the Republic of Korea with a cocar’s bank, but the Defendant did not know that he was cocars inside the bank.

subsection (b) of this section.

2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the Defendant appears to have been aware of the existence of a cocar in a household room. Thus, the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion is not acceptable.

(1) An accomplice.