2. The judgment of the court below is against the defendant's confession of the facts charged in this case. However, the crime in this case is deemed to be inhaled in a park passing through the general public, and there is a need to strictly control the defendant as there is a danger that the defendant will proceed to another crime under the influence of the scambling of hallucinogenic substances. The defendant has been punished several times with the previous department, and the defendant committed the crime in this case without being aware of the repeated period of the same kind of crime. As such, it is judged that there is a need to isolate the defendant who is dependent on hallucinogenic substances from a harmful environment for a certain period. The court below determined that the defendant's punishment is necessary in consideration of the above circumstances, including the fact that the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, the circumstance and contents leading to the crime in this case, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the sentence in the court below is unreasonable because it is too unreasonable.

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.