A. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible.

2. The crime of this case is determined by the Defendant’s import of mert clophophones (hereinafter “philopphones”), a local mental medicine, from abroad. The amount of philopphones imported is 98.68g in total.

In addition, the Defendant first expressed his/her intention to participate in the crime in contact with a foreign organization of sales of phiphones, and actively participated in the organized crime of smuggling, such as hiding it on the clothes that he/she received from a foreign country and bringing it into the Republic of Korea.

Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant is against his or her wrong judgment, and there is no criminal conviction except when he or she was sentenced to a fine once due to the crime of aiding and abetting opening gambling.

All of the philophones imported by the defendant were confiscated and not distributed in Korea, and cooperation was made in investigation by identifying the identity of the accomplice.

It seems that family members have maintained social ties in a normal way, such as the birth of the defendant's wife.

Such circumstances are favorable to the defendant.

In full view of these circumstances, Defendant’s age, sex, environment, circumstances, and consequence of the crime, all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant case, such as the circumstances after the crime, and the recommended sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the sentencing guidelines by the Supreme Court, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too heavy or too unreasonable.

3. According to the conclusion, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in entirety in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that there are no grounds.