A. The lower court’s sentencing is too inappropriate.

B. The lower court’s sentencing is too uncomfortable.

2. Considering the fact that the crime of this case is not good, and that the defendant committed repeatedly the crime of this case even though he had a previous conviction in several times, strict punishment against the defendant is necessary.

However, the Defendant’s mistake is divided, and the crime of this case is one of the concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act with regard to the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. for which the judgment has become final and conclusive, and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act should consider equity with the case where the judgment is to be rendered simultaneously under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. Considering the sentencing balance with the same crime, and other conditions of sentencing specified in the argument of this case, such as the Defendant’s age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is deemed appropriate, and is too heavy or too unreasonable. Thus, the above argument by the Defendant and the prosecutor is without merit.

3. In conclusion, since the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.