2. The judgment of the court below is in favor of the defendant who led to the confession of each of the crimes of this case, while the defendant was serving eight times a sentence for the same kind of crime, and on June 14, 2012, the Daegu District Court sentenced ten months to imprisonment for the same violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. on January 17, 2013 and completed the enforcement of the sentence, and committed each of the crimes of this case during the repeated crime period, and the defendant himself/herself not only administered but also delivered a phiphone to F, and the nature of the crime is not good. The court below recommended types of crimes according to the guidelines for sentencing for narcotics crimes of the Supreme Court [Basic Crimes of Violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. due to the delivery of phiphones: Violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. due to the delivery of phiphones: Violation of the basic crime: Imprisonment with prison labor for the defendant; one year and six years to six years; the defendant's motive for or six years of imprisonment with prison labor; the defendant's motive or six years period of imprisonment with prison labor.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

However, in accordance with Article 25 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, if Article 25 of the judgment of the court below is applied, "the pertinent Article of the Act on the 1. Criminal Crimes" shall be construed as "the pertinent Article of the Act on the 1. Criminal Crimes and the choice of punishment", and "the choice of imprisonment" shall be construed as "after Article 2 subparagraph 3 (b)"