A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year of imprisonment, one hundred thousand won of additional collection) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. The circumstances favorable to the defendant include the fact that the judgment of the crime is recognized and against the fact that the narcotics offender cooperates with the arrest of the narcotics offender.

However, the crime of this case is committed without being aware of it during the period of repeated crime due to the same crime, and the fact that there is a record of nine times or criminal punishment due to the same crime is disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

Therefore, in full view of all the sentencing conditions of the defendant's age, sexual conduct, health, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, etc., and all the sentencing conditions in the records and theories of the case mentioned above, including the defendant's age, sexual conduct, health, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, the method and consequence of the crime, the circumstance after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below is too heavy or it cannot be deemed unfair, and thus, the defendant and the prosecutor's improper assertion of sentencing are without merit.

3. In conclusion, since the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.