A. The Defendant, at the time of committing the instant crime, was in a state of mental and physical loss or mental weakness due to depression, textile booming, etc., but the lower court erred by misapprehending this.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (ten months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, two years of probation, observation of protection, and collection) is too unreasonable.

2. According to the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mental and physical disorder, the fact that the defendant received pharmacologic treatment and interview treatment by means of depression from around March 2015, 199, e.g., heavy telegraph pains caused by yellow disorder and fibers, and the fact that the symptoms of suicide accident, aggression, emotional distress, depression, etc. continue even after treatment.

However, in light of the circumstances of the instant crime, means and methods, the Defendant’s act before and after the commission of the crime, etc., such as access to the bitco exchange, and payment of the purchase price for marijuana as a bitco, and the fact that the Defendant stated in detail the situation at the time of the commission of the crime at the investigative agency, and the Defendant’s act before and after the commission of the crime, the Defendant was deemed to have lost the ability to discern things or make decisions

is not recognized.

The above assertion by the defendant is without merit.

3. The court below held that there is a need to strictly punish the defendant as to the unfair argument of sentencing, under the circumstances unfavorable to the defendant, such as ① avoiding the body and mind of an individual due to their crypology, toxicity, etc., as well as the risk of undermining the health and social safety of the people. Each of the crimes of this case is that the defendant, who purchased marijuana, smokes marijuana once after the defendant purchased it, and the liability for the crime is not less than that against the defendant's mistake, ② in favorable circumstances, the defendant reflects his mistake, and there is no criminal history other than a fine once, and the crime of purchasing marijuana of this case aims to gain profits by distributing marijuana.