2. The judgment that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflects on the fact, and that the number of phiphones received is relatively large.

The fact that it is difficult to see the fact, the fact that the opon medication was no longer attempted after the attempt to administer the opon, the fact that the opon dose appears to be a crime by the self-defense, and the fact that there is no record of punishment for the same crime is favorable.

However, the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case during the period of repeated crime due to the crime of this kind, and the crime of narcotics is highly harmful to society, so there is a need for strict punishment.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means, and consequence, there is no special change in circumstances that may otherwise determine the sentencing conditions and the punishment different from the original judgment, such as the circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant and the prosecutor's assertion are without merit.

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