A. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor (ten months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unfair.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Regarding the prosecutor's judgment and the defendant's arguments, the defendant reflects the wrongness while making a confession of the crime of this case; the amount of phiphones handled by the crime of this case is smaller; the defendant's family members and branch people appear to read personal ties, such as the defendant's desire to take the defendant's wife; on the other hand, in light of drug addiction and harm caused by medication, there is a need to strictly punish and eradicate narcotics crimes; on the other hand, it seems that the maternity appraisal result resulted from "training" reaction (4 cm from mother to 4 cm); on the other hand, it seems that the defendant's phiphone addiction degree seems not to be negligible; on the other hand, the defendant had the history of having been sentenced to punishment eight times or more due to the same crime; on the other hand, the defendant's prompt criminal investigation and trial conducted from the investigative agency to the third public trial day; on the other hand, the defendant's basic motive and condition for the crime of this case's punishment; on the other hand, the defendant's recommendations and the basic sentencing guidelines of the defendant's punishment of this case.

3. In conclusion, since each appeal by the prosecutor and the defendant is without merit, all appeals are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.