Supreme Court: Evidence of 'Drug Use' Obtained Through 'Drug Delivery' Seizure Warrant Is Not Illegally Collected

Supreme Court, Seocho-gu, Seoul. Photo by Honam Moon munonam@

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Daehyun] The Supreme Court has ruled that evidence obtained through a search warrant issued for drug distribution charges, which was then used to secure evidence for drug use charges, is not an illegal collection of evidence.

On the 19th, the Supreme Court's 3rd Division (Presiding Justice Noh Jeonghee) announced that it overturned the original sentence of 1 year and 4 months imprisonment in the appeal trial of a man in his 50s, Mr. A, who was indicted for violating the Narcotics Control Act, and remanded the case to the Ulsan District Court.

Earlier, Mr. A was prosecuted for allegedly using methamphetamine in the restroom of a hospital in Asan City, Chungnam Province, in September last year. At that time, the police obtained a search warrant on the grounds that "Mr. A distributed methamphetamine free of charge in July last year," and seized his urine and hair samples, which tested positive for methamphetamine.

In court, Mr. A's side argued, "The defendant's confession and photos related to the methamphetamine use charges were derived from evidence collected through an illegal execution of the warrant," and claimed, "Since this is illegally obtained evidence, it cannot be used as evidence to recognize guilt."

The first trial found all charges against Mr. A guilty and sentenced him to 1 year and 6 months imprisonment. However, the second trial acquitted him of the 'use' charge and reduced the sentence to 1 year and 4 months.

The second trial court pointed out, "The seizure of separate evidence unrelated to the charges constitutes illegally collected evidence," and stated, "It lacks evidentiary value, and excluding this, the remaining evidence is insufficient to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt."

However, the Supreme Court ordered a retrial and reconsideration of the case. The court stated, "For crimes that are the purpose of the search and seizure or related crimes, the results of the search and seizure can be used as evidence of guilt," and added, "The lower court erred in its understanding of the 'relevance' in the search and seizure and the exclusionary rule of illegally obtained evidence, which affected the judgment."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.