마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The punishment of the lower court (one year of imprisonment) for an appeal is too unreasonable.
2. If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the court below, and the sentencing of the court below does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined the sentence against the Defendant by comprehensively taking into account the favorable circumstances and unfavorable conditions for the Defendant.
The circumstance that the defendant asserts as the reason for appeal (such as the confession and the purchase of philophones for the purpose of simple medication) seems to have already been considered in the sentencing process of the original court.
In addition, there is no new change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below in the trial.
In full view of the following factors: (a) even though the court below was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for the same kind of crime as stated in the judgment of the court below for the same type of crime, the Defendant committed a part of the crime before ten days have not passed since the above judgment became final and conclusive; (b) the Defendant purchased and administered phiphonephones in this case; (c) one year imprisonment sentenced by the court below falls under the lowest in the sentencing guidelines table of the Supreme Court; (d) on the other hand, the Defendant supports the mother of the Defendant who is not healthy due to clicos, etc.; (e) the Defendant suffers from trees, probationary symptoms, almar infection, almar hexane, etc.; and (e) the Defendant’s consciousness and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (e) the circumstances after the crime, etc., as a whole, the sentence of the court below cannot be deemed unfair because it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.
(3) In conclusion, the appeal by the defendant is without merit, and Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act is without merit. Thus, the appeal by the court below is without merit.