2. The crime of this case is considered to have been administered by the Defendant, who is a psychotropic drug, and the fact that the Defendant recognized the crime of this case and made a mistake against the Defendant, and that a reply to fact-finding that the Defendant arrested a narcotic offender at the lower court’s cooperation in the investigation was submitted, etc. are favorable to the Defendant.

However, on September 14, 2012, the Defendant has been punished several times for the same crime (one time of fine and two times of imprisonment), and on February 2, 2013, after being sentenced to imprisonment for the same crime at the Busan District Court on September 14, 2012, the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of the fact that the execution of the sentence was completed during the repeated crime period, and there is a need to strictly punish the instant crime as a serious crime with social harm and risk of recidivism. As a result of the application of the sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Commission of the Supreme Court (the scope of recommendation: between one year and three years of imprisonment, the previous case as a special person with the same special punishment) and other circumstances that form the conditions for the sentencing and arguments of this case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, circumstances, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the Defendant’s sentence is too unfair.

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.