2. Although there are no circumstances that consider the circumstances such as equity in the case where the Defendant’s judgment on the grounds of appeal is against the Defendant, and the smoke of marijuana is inhaled once, the crime of this case is committed with the final judgment. However, even though the Defendant had the same criminal record, he again committed the crime of this case; the Defendant appears to have determined the sentence by taking into account all the circumstances favorable to the Defendant; there is no change in special circumstances or circumstances that may be newly considered in sentencing after the pronouncement of the lower judgment; and other various circumstances that are conditions for sentencing as shown in the arguments and records of this case, including the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime is committed, it is not recognized that the sentence of this case is unreasonable because it is excessively unreasonable.

Therefore, we cannot accept the defendant's above assertion.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant is groundless. It is so decided as per

[However, the first head of the lower judgment’s criminal facts as of February 4, 2015; “10 months of imprisonment”; “10 months of imprisonment”; “1. Probation and lecture attendance order” in the application of the statutes as “Probation 1.”; “1. Probation” in the application of the Act and subordinate statutes; “1. Probation and lecture order” in the summary of evidence; and “a criminal investigation report (the confirmation of the facts of concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act)” is deleted.