Korean Law Demystified!

Courier for Ketamine: Supreme Court Upholds 10-Year Sentence for 60-Year-Old Drug Accomplice

⚖️ Case Summary

Defendant:
A man in his 60s (A) convicted of aiding the smuggling and storage of ketamine and ecstasy in exchange for payment.

Supreme Court Ruling:

Date: August 28, 2025

Court: Supreme Court Criminal Division 3 (Presiding Justice Noh Kyung-pil)

Decision: Dismissed A’s appeal, upholding 10 years in prison and forfeiture of ₩345.94 million (approx. USD 250,000).


Criminal Acts (Facts of the Case):

Between March and July 2024, A conspired with overseas drug dealers to help smuggle ketamine into Korea.

He used contact information provided by foreign sellers to coordinate with delivery companies and monitor local couriers.

Approximately 11 kilograms of ketamine were smuggled into Korea in three separate shipments from Germany and Switzerland (2–5 kg each).

In August 2024, under orders from his superiors, A:

Retrieved 5–6 kg of ketamine from a mountain area in Icheon and stored it in a safe in Ansan.

Collected about 700 ecstasy tablets near Surisan hiking trail and kept them together with the ketamine.



Trial Court (1st Instance):

Applied the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes (Article 11):

Subparagraph 1: For drugs worth ≥ ₩50 million → life or ≥10 years imprisonment.

Subparagraph 2: For drugs worth ₩5 million–₩50 million → life or ≥7 years imprisonment.


Found:

In the smuggling incidents, A may not have known the exact value (≥ ₩50 million), but he was aware it exceeded ₩5 million.

In the storage incidents, A directly handled the drugs and knew the large quantity/value involved.


Sentence: 10 years in prison + ₩345.94 million forfeiture.


Appeal Court (2nd Instance):

Dismissed A’s appeal.

Found the sentence not excessive, considering:

His repeated involvement,

The amount of drugs,

The financial benefits received,

Support from the criminal organization (rent and deposit payments).



Supreme Court (Final Judgment):

Affirmed both lower courts.

Held that the sentence was not unjustly harsh given:

The seriousness of the crime,

A’s age, circumstances, and motives,

His active and ongoing role in the smuggling operation.

Article: https://www.lawtimes.co.kr/Case-curation/211882