2. Considering the fact that the Defendant led to the confession of, reflects on, and satisfying the commission of the crime, the crime of this case is not likely to be committed by the Defendant by selling or delivering it to a third party instead of administering or smoking phiphones and marijuana. The amount of philophones and marijuana handled by the Defendant is considerable, the Defendant’s records of criminal punishment for the same crime are several times, and each of the crimes of this case was committed during the period of repeated crime due to the same crime. In full view of all other circumstances, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive, means and consequence of the crime of this case, and circumstances after the crime, etc., which are conditions for sentencing, the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

(However) However, it is obvious that "the sale, receipt, and medication of opphones" in the first column of the fifth page of the judgment of the court below is a clerical error in the transaction, receipt, medication, and possession of opphones, and such act is corrected ex officio in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure.