2. In full view of the facts that there was no record of inhaleing hallucinogenic substances after 2014, there was no record of criminal punishment for the same kind of crime except for the power of fines due to the violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, the confession and reflect of the crime, and other factors for sentencing indicated in the arguments and records in the instant case, the lower court appears to have reasonably determined by fully considering all circumstances, including various factors for sentencing asserted by the prosecutor, including the fact that the Defendant was subject to juvenile protective disposition several times for the same crime, and no special circumstance exists to the extent that the lower court’s punishment is to change.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.