2. In the case of narcotics-related crimes, it is necessary to strictly punish not only an individual’s body and mind due to toxicity, etc., but also an individual’s body and mind due to high risk of harming citizens’ health and social safety.

Since the number of crimes committed by the accused is not so much enough, the liability for the crime is not easy.

Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the Defendant recognized all crimes, committed a mistake in depth, and voluntarily attended the investigation agency.

There is no criminal history against the defendant.

The defendant shows a relatively old level of intention to cut narcotics with a relatively old undergraduate, and family members complaining of the ship's wife, and the defendant raised a thorough decoration.

Such circumstances are favorable to the defendant.

In full view of the circumstances unfavorable or favorable to the defendant as above, and other various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments, such as the defendant's career, sex, environment, family relationship, social bond relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the court below which sentenced the defendant to a fine is too uncomponed so that the defendant can take a new departure, and thus, is unreasonable.

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