A. The sentence of the lower court (a year of imprisonment, confiscation, and collection) is too heavy.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence is too minor.

2. After rendering the judgment of the court below, the defendant cooperation in the investigation by informing 2 narcotics offenders.

However, considering these circumstances, even if we consider these circumstances, the court below's favorable circumstances (the relationship between family and social ties seems to be strong, the previous criminal records of the same kind are old, which has low value to be considered, and the crime of this case is simply administered and possessed twice or more, etc.) and unfavorable circumstances (the amount of phiphonephones discovered about about 300 times as soon as possible, it cannot be deemed to have been administered for a simple purpose, and two narcotics crimes reported by the defendant after the decision of the court below is not the upper line of the defendant.

In full view of all the conditions of the argument and the record of the instant case including the Defendant’s age character and character intelligent environment, motive and means of crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., including the fact that the lower court’s sentencing judgment exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion.

There is no circumstance that the assessment or maintenance thereof is deemed unfair (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Therefore, the lower court’s sentencing is appropriate, and the Defendant and the Prosecutor’s assertion are without merit.

3. In conclusion, since the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.