The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendants (Defendant A: imprisonment of 3 years and 6 months, confiscation, additional collection, Defendant B: imprisonment of 4 years and 6 months, confiscation, additional collection) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

In the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts, namely, ① Defendant A imports the 100 grams via two times, and the 133.69 grams in the rophones in the brophones, and Defendant B imports Defendant A’s aforementioned two times in the crime of importing rophones by concealing the 124.72g rophones in the panty; ② Defendant A received two million won from Defendant B in return for the carriage of rophones; ② Defendant A received two million won from Defendant B in return for the carriage of rophones; ③ Defendant A sought a room in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G from Defendant B in return for the sale of imported rophones; ③ Defendant A divided the rophones into Defendant C, a fraud, and affixed them at a selling place twice a day.

In full view of the fact that the Defendants were aware of the fact that imported philophones are at least five million won, respectively.

I would like to say.

The Defendants’ assertion on this part is without merit.

As to the unfair argument of sentencing, the lower court has all the elements of sentencing and the records of the instant argument, including favorable circumstances, unfavorable circumstances, etc., including the Defendants’ age character and character environment, motive means of crime, and the circumstances after the crime, and the Supreme Court.