All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable as the Defendant’s punishment (an additional collection of KRW 1 year, 10 months, 903,00) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor (unfair sentencing) by the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. We also examine the reasons for each appeal by the Defendant and the Prosecutor.

The fact that the Defendant recognized the entire crime of this case, against his wrongness, and that there is a conspiracy to support, and that there seems to exist social ties, such as repeated application of the Defendant’s wife, etc., are favorable to the Defendant.

On the other hand, in light of the addiction of narcotics and the harm caused by the administration of narcotics, etc., it is necessary to strictly punish and eradicate the crime of this case. The crime of this case is disadvantageous to the defendant, such as not only the defendant administered or smoked each penphone or marijuana once, but also the defendant provided and disseminated a penphone to other narcotics offenders, and the crime of this case is not good in the nature of the crime, and the result of the maternal evaluation is "componing". In light of the fact that the defendant's phiphone addiction was caused by reaction, it seems that the defendant's phiphone addiction seems not only to have the record of criminal punishment for the crime of narcotics, but also the defendant committed the crime of this case again regardless of the fact that he was sentenced to punishment for the crime of narcotics, etc., and even if he was released from the prison with punishment for the crime of this case, even if he was designated as a part of the crime of this case.

In the above circumstances and the trial of the above, the circumstances in which part of the defendant was involved in the investigation information of another narcotics offender were confirmed, but such circumstance alone is difficult to see as an important investigation cooperation that may affect the sentencing of the defendant, and other circumstances such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, means and method of crime, results, etc.