2. The defense counsel of the defendant submitted a written confirmation of cooperation in the investigation to the trial of the defendant, after receiving a written confirmation from the local police agency of the Gyeongnam-do and the Busan Jin Police Station, but a third party, other than the defendant, informed the investigation agency of the person who committed narcotics, and

In addition, it cannot be deemed that the content of the reported narcotics crime is more severe than that of the defendant when compared with the crime in this case, or because it is difficult to view that the nature of the crime is more severe in the course of the crime, the quantity, frequency, and period of the crime, narcotics, etc. of many persons, it cannot be deemed that it constitutes "important investigation cooperation" as indicated in the sentencing guidelines. Although the defendant stated in the investigative agency about S and S that the defendant issued a phiphone to the defendant, it cannot be deemed that it is a change of circumstances that have occurred newly after the decision of the court below was made, the punishment sentenced by the court below shall not be deemed to be a change of circumstances that have occurred. The scope of the recommended punishment (one year and six months to June)

1. Type 2 (person subject to special sentencing) (referring to marijuana, flag, item (b), (c), etc.) (referring to a person subject to suspended execution for not more than 3 years): The area subject to aggravated punishment (decision on the territory of recommendation) of the same criminal history and the area subject to aggravated punishment: One year and 6 months to 4 years; and

2. Class 3 (Special Sentencing) (referring to persons who are in charge of sentencing) of the Class 2 and 3 (Determination of Type): Imprisonment with prison labor for one year to 3 years.

3. The result of the increase in the final scope of punishment by majority of the crimes (Article 1/2(1/3 of the upper limit of the crime No. 2 of the upper limit of the crime No. 1): The lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable in light of the following: (a) the lower court’s detailed reasons for sentencing, including the Defendant’s previous conviction and the time of committing the crime, etc.

3. Conclusion of the defendant.