2. The crime of this case is considered to have been administered respectively by the Defendant, who is a psychotropic drug, provided F with the Mepters free of charge even if the Defendant is not a person handling narcotics, and the Defendant recognized the crime of this case, against the mistake, and actively cooperated in the investigation of narcotics by an investigative agency, etc., which are favorable to the Defendant.

However, in full view of the records and arguments of this case, the defendant has been punished several times due to the same criminal act (in fact eight times, one fine), the criminal act of this case was committed during the repeated crime period due to the same criminal act, the narcotics-related crime needs to be strictly punished as a serious crime with severe social harm and risk of recidivism, and the result of the application of the sentencing guidelines by the Sentencing Commission of the Supreme Court [the scope of recommending punishment: between October and two years] and other various circumstances that form the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, circumstances, means and consequence of the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

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