2. The judgment is recognized as favorable circumstances, such as the defendant's time to commit the instant crime, the purchase of phiphones, and the administration thereof two times, but the amount of phiphones purchased or administered by the defendant is not significant. The defendant has a record of being punished for the same kind of crime. The instant crime was a repeated crime due to the same punishment. The instant crime was a repeated crime due to the above punishment, and the crime of narcotics is not easy to detect due to its characteristics, and the risk of recidivism is high, and there is a need to strictize it as well as negative impact on society.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, there is no special change of circumstances that make the original judgment and the punishment different from the circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.