(F) The punishment sentenced by the court below (no more than 10 months of imprisonment, confiscation, additional collection of 4,471,00 won) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

The Defendant recognizes all of the instant crimes, and reflects on the recognition of them, and is in the course of cutting off with narcotics, etc.

After the defendant was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment due to the violation of the Toxic Chemicals Control Act in 1994, there is no record of punishment for the same or similar crime.

The mother of the defendant seems to be missing in the crime of narcotics due to dynasty flasium, the father's health status is not good, and economic difficulties are not high.

Such circumstances are favorable to the defendant.

However, narcotics crimes are likely to harm the health and social safety of the people as well as the physical and mental health of individuals, and there is a need to strictly punish narcotics crimes as they have a negative impact on the whole society due to their sense and toxicity.

The defendant's purchase, medication, smoking, and possession of philophones and marijuana, as well as arranging the trade of philophones, and the transfer of philophones and marijuana handled is very heavy.

The defendant continuously purchased philophones and marijuana while being investigated by the investigative agency due to the crime of philophone medication, etc.

Prior to the instant case, the Defendant has been subject to punishment in addition to punishment imposed upon him/her, and has been punished several times.

Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the defendant.

If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court as an appellate court.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the circumstances alleged by the Health Center and the Defendant as an element of sentencing are already discovered in the hearing process of the lower court.