2. In full view of the following circumstances, the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is deemed appropriate in light of all of the following factors: the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relations, the frequency and amount of handling philophones, and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

The favorable circumstances: The fact that each of the crimes in this case is recognized to have been cut off, the fact that it is not even a crime such as professional writing-on sales brokerage, etc., but a disadvantageous condition is not a crime: Narcotics-related crime requires strict measures as a crime that causes the mination of individuals, families, and society as a whole; the defendant has committed a crime under the suspension of execution due to the same crime [2016No. 3448] while he/she escaped during the period of the suspension of execution due to the same crime, and again runs away during the investigation and again again [2016No. 1280], the defendant attempted to administer a penphone with others beyond being administered by himself/herself, and attempted to administer a penphone together with others; the result of appraisal ( May 2015) confirms the response to the phiphone training from the whole hair of the police officer in the course of arrest; and the crime that misrepresents another person's identity in the course of arrest is also not weak.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.

[However, pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, “(s)” shall be corrected to add “(s) on the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc.” after the fourth five sentence of imprisonment under the sentence of the lower judgment.