2. The crime of this case is recognized that the Defendant administered philophones once even though he is not a narcotics handler, and the Defendant recognized and reflected the crime of this case, the frequency of medication is limited to one time, and the most child who should support is to be supported.

However, the Defendant, without being aware of the fact that he was committed during the period of repeated crime for the same crime, was committed in the instant crime without being aware of it, and the quality of the crime is not good. Narcotics crimes cause the degradation of individuals, homes, society, and human beings as a whole, and thus need to be punished strictly in that they are social pathology beyond individual criminal acts. In full view of various other circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, sex, motive, means, and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by 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 grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.