Crimes that violate the Narcotics Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Narcotics Control Act’) have very complex and diverse aspects. In the first place, the types of 'narcotics' classified by the Narcotic Drugs Control Act ('narcotics in a narrow sense' such as poppy and cocaine, cannabis, and psychotropic drugs prescribed by Presidential Decree) are very diverse, and so-called 'new types of narcotics' that are processed or synthesized in new ways. arises.
Looking at the types of acts that constitute a violation of the Narcotic Drugs Control Act, it ranges from simple purchase, possession, storage, and use by non-narcotics handlers to manufacturing (cultivation), sale (“wholesale/retail”), and even organized activities by several people. There are many differences in the way drugs are brought into the country from abroad (import). The routes through which drugs are introduced into the country, their distribution (transaction) methods, and the ways they are used by ‘end consumers’ are also diversifying.
Just looking at media reports, it seems like Korea is gradually moving away from being a ‘drug-free country.’ The age at which people first encounter drugs has decreased, with even minors becoming involved in the illegal distribution of drugs. The method of trading (selling) drugs has also become clandestine, simple, and easy. In particular, transactions using virtual assets, Telegram, and accounts in other people's names (“cannon accounts”) that are difficult to track have become very common. Accordingly, the Ministry of Justice and law enforcement agencies declared a strong response to drug-related crimes.
The number of people requesting counseling is increasing as they are being investigated and tried for violations of the Narcotics Control Act. During the argument of a criminal trial, the defendant(s) who heard the prosecutor's sentence (e.g., “Please sentence the defendant to XX years in prison, an order to complete rehabilitation education, and a fine of $$ won”) are particularly burdened and curious. One of the topics covered is surcharges.
Article 67 (Confiscation) of the Narcotic Drugs Control Act states, ‘Narcotics, temporary narcotics, facilities, equipment, funds or transportation means provided for crimes stipulated in this Act (Narcotics Control Act), and the resulting proceeds shall be confiscated. However, if it cannot be confiscated, the value will be collected, and the drugs themselves (temporary drugs), facilities, equipment, funds, profits, etc. used in drug-related crimes will be confiscated from the defendant. In cases where confiscation is not possible, it is stipulated that an equivalent amount be collected from the defendant (necessary confiscation/collection).
In particular, confiscation (collection) under the Narcotic Drugs Control Act is not intended to simply deprive people of profits obtained from criminal acts (such as handling narcotics), but is a disposition with a ‘punitive’ nature, and is a measure of a ‘punitive’ nature, and is a measure of ‘punitive’ nature. Even if no drugs were taken, the court must not only order the collection of the value, but also order the owner or final possessor (of the narcotics) as well as those who handled the same narcotics to collect the entire price within the scope of their handling. It is a court ruling that this must be done.
For example, let's consider a case where (1) you purchase drugs from a seller, use and consume some of them, and possess (store) the remaining amount, but are arrested and brought to trial [simple possession, storage, use] ]. Drugs possessed without use will naturally be confiscated and subsequently go through the process of confiscation and disposal, but an amount equivalent to the value of the product (narcotics) itself will also be collected for amounts that have already been consumed and cannot be confiscated. Even for parts that have been ‘already used and lost’, you will not be overlooked and will be held criminally responsible. Of course, in order to calculate how much to collect from the actor (defendant), it is necessary to know exactly how much narcotics the actor consumed (the amount used must be 'specified'), and in cases where this cannot be specified even through evidence records, practice There may also be cases where additional fines are not issued separately.
(2) But what if you are not just in possession of narcotics, but you are selling them for a price and are caught by the investigative agency and arrested (cultivation, sale, possession/storage for the purpose of sale, etc.)? As can be seen from the text of Article 67 of the Narcotic Drugs Control Act, it is not only the drugs themselves, but also the facilities and equipment provided for the crime in question (e.g., various professional equipment used to cultivate cannabis, although detailed explanations cannot be given), funds, or money obtained through the sale of drugs. All proceeds may be confiscated or collected (if they cannot be confiscated from the actors).
If a sale is made to multiple people for a fee, the drug portion that has already been sold and is no longer in the seller's possession can be viewed as 'handling' the drug. Therefore, if evidence is derived that can specifically specify the amount of narcotics handled (since in most cases, sales records, etc. are bound to exist), not only will the narcotics, equipment, and profits in possession or storage be confiscated (confiscated), but the proceeds will also be confiscated. You should also be prepared to collect the equivalent amount. In particular, if several actors commit a drug crime by jointly handling drugs, collection is carried out as a ‘punitive disposition’ within the scope of each person’s handling of the drug. Each of the defendants will have to pay the same amount of fines.
Due to the nature of drug crimes, the harm they cause to society is serious and serious, the distribution of drugs is gradually expanding, there is a great public interest need to actively prevent the illegal distribution and spread of drugs, and punitive collection is also handled by each person. Considering the fact that the scope of narcotics is limited, there seems to be little room for disagreement with the current interpretation that views the additional collection under the Narcotic Drugs Control Act as a 'punitive disposition'.
■ Reference precedent: Supreme Court decision 99Do1695, pronounced on July 9, 1999, Supreme Court decision 89Do1920, sentenced on December 8, 1989, Supreme Court decision 2001Do5158, sentenced on December 28, 2001 (for each person in case of joint crime) Cases where the full amount of value was ordered to be collected within the scope of what he handled), etc.
Looking at the types of acts that constitute a violation of the Narcotic Drugs Control Act, it ranges from simple purchase, possession, storage, and use by non-narcotics handlers to manufacturing (cultivation), sale (“wholesale/retail”), and even organized activities by several people. There are many differences in the way drugs are brought into the country from abroad (import). The routes through which drugs are introduced into the country, their distribution (transaction) methods, and the ways they are used by ‘end consumers’ are also diversifying.
Just looking at media reports, it seems like Korea is gradually moving away from being a ‘drug-free country.’ The age at which people first encounter drugs has decreased, with even minors becoming involved in the illegal distribution of drugs. The method of trading (selling) drugs has also become clandestine, simple, and easy. In particular, transactions using virtual assets, Telegram, and accounts in other people's names (“cannon accounts”) that are difficult to track have become very common. Accordingly, the Ministry of Justice and law enforcement agencies declared a strong response to drug-related crimes.
The number of people requesting counseling is increasing as they are being investigated and tried for violations of the Narcotics Control Act. During the argument of a criminal trial, the defendant(s) who heard the prosecutor's sentence (e.g., “Please sentence the defendant to XX years in prison, an order to complete rehabilitation education, and a fine of $$ won”) are particularly burdened and curious. One of the topics covered is surcharges.
Article 67 (Confiscation) of the Narcotic Drugs Control Act states, ‘Narcotics, temporary narcotics, facilities, equipment, funds or transportation means provided for crimes stipulated in this Act (Narcotics Control Act), and the resulting proceeds shall be confiscated. However, if it cannot be confiscated, the value will be collected, and the drugs themselves (temporary drugs), facilities, equipment, funds, profits, etc. used in drug-related crimes will be confiscated from the defendant. In cases where confiscation is not possible, it is stipulated that an equivalent amount be collected from the defendant (necessary confiscation/collection).
In particular, confiscation (collection) under the Narcotic Drugs Control Act is not intended to simply deprive people of profits obtained from criminal acts (such as handling narcotics), but is a disposition with a ‘punitive’ nature, and is a measure of a ‘punitive’ nature, and is a measure of ‘punitive’ nature. Even if no drugs were taken, the court must not only order the collection of the value, but also order the owner or final possessor (of the narcotics) as well as those who handled the same narcotics to collect the entire price within the scope of their handling. It is a court ruling that this must be done.
For example, let's consider a case where (1) you purchase drugs from a seller, use and consume some of them, and possess (store) the remaining amount, but are arrested and brought to trial [simple possession, storage, use] ]. Drugs possessed without use will naturally be confiscated and subsequently go through the process of confiscation and disposal, but an amount equivalent to the value of the product (narcotics) itself will also be collected for amounts that have already been consumed and cannot be confiscated. Even for parts that have been ‘already used and lost’, you will not be overlooked and will be held criminally responsible. Of course, in order to calculate how much to collect from the actor (defendant), it is necessary to know exactly how much narcotics the actor consumed (the amount used must be 'specified'), and in cases where this cannot be specified even through evidence records, practice There may also be cases where additional fines are not issued separately.
(2) But what if you are not just in possession of narcotics, but you are selling them for a price and are caught by the investigative agency and arrested (cultivation, sale, possession/storage for the purpose of sale, etc.)? As can be seen from the text of Article 67 of the Narcotic Drugs Control Act, it is not only the drugs themselves, but also the facilities and equipment provided for the crime in question (e.g., various professional equipment used to cultivate cannabis, although detailed explanations cannot be given), funds, or money obtained through the sale of drugs. All proceeds may be confiscated or collected (if they cannot be confiscated from the actors).
If a sale is made to multiple people for a fee, the drug portion that has already been sold and is no longer in the seller's possession can be viewed as 'handling' the drug. Therefore, if evidence is derived that can specifically specify the amount of narcotics handled (since in most cases, sales records, etc. are bound to exist), not only will the narcotics, equipment, and profits in possession or storage be confiscated (confiscated), but the proceeds will also be confiscated. You should also be prepared to collect the equivalent amount. In particular, if several actors commit a drug crime by jointly handling drugs, collection is carried out as a ‘punitive disposition’ within the scope of each person’s handling of the drug. Each of the defendants will have to pay the same amount of fines.
Due to the nature of drug crimes, the harm they cause to society is serious and serious, the distribution of drugs is gradually expanding, there is a great public interest need to actively prevent the illegal distribution and spread of drugs, and punitive collection is also handled by each person. Considering the fact that the scope of narcotics is limited, there seems to be little room for disagreement with the current interpretation that views the additional collection under the Narcotic Drugs Control Act as a 'punitive disposition'.
■ Reference precedent: Supreme Court decision 99Do1695, pronounced on July 9, 1999, Supreme Court decision 89Do1920, sentenced on December 8, 1989, Supreme Court decision 2001Do5158, sentenced on December 28, 2001 (for each person in case of joint crime) Cases where the full amount of value was ordered to be collected within the scope of what he handled), etc.
