2. The crime of this case is judged that the defendant administered 0.05 g of philopon on one occasion and possessed a philopon by keeping a disposable injection device containing approximately 0.41 g of philopon, and there is a need to severely punish not only harm to an individual's mental and physical health but also harm caused to society due to its toxicity, and it is necessary to severely punish the crime of this case. The defendant had the record of being punished for the same drug crime four times before the crime of this case. In particular, the defendant committed the crime of this case without being able to commit the repeated crime of this case during the period of repeated crime due to the same drug crime.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant led to the confession of the crime of this case and reflects his mistake in depth, the defendant appears to have actively cooperated in the investigation by informing the investigation agency of his superior line, and the fact that the defendant's family members want to take the preference of the defendant is favorable to the defendant.

In full view of the aforementioned circumstances and other various sentencing conditions as seen above, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family environment, motive and background of the offense, means and consequence of the offense, and the circumstances before and after the offense, it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too heavy or unreasonable.

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