2. The judgment of the defendant is in a favorable condition such as the confession of the crime of this case and the fact that the defendant's wife wanted the defendant's wife. However, the crime of this case is necessary to strictly punish and eradicate narcotics crimes in light of the addiction of narcotics and the harm caused by administration of narcotics due to the issuance of a phiphone to another narcotics offender. At the time of arrest, the defendant's vehicle at the time of arrest was seized and there was a history of punishment for selling phiphones. The defendant seems to have been selling phiphones in a professional way. In addition, the defendant was punished several times for the same crime (10 times). In particular, the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the same kind of crime on February 14, 2014 and committed the crime of this case during the period of repeated execution of the sentence, and the result of the defendant's recommendation for the crime of this case is less likely to be less than the result of the defendant's recommendation for the crime of this case (the result of the defendant's recommendation for the crime of this case.)

The scope of title, provision, recommendation (aggravated, Aggravated, - Aggravated Punishment: Imprisonment of one year and six years from June to four years), the fact that there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may be newly considered after the decision of the court below was made, and the court below’s punishment is unreasonable if all of the sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments of this case, such as the defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., are considered, and thus, the defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. Thus, the defendant's appeal is without merit and Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.