Of the disposition of the lower court, “307,608 Won” shall be deemed as “307,680 Won”.

2) The collection is so unreasonable that it is too unreasonable.

2. However, there are extenuating circumstances to consider the Defendant, such as that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and divided his mistake, that the Defendant voluntarily reported part of the instant crime through his wife, and that the Defendant contributed to the investigation of the narcotics crime.

However, the crime of this case is likely to be criticized in that the Defendant traded, administers, or possessed phiphonephones, and received, smoke, or possessed marijuana, and the nature of the crime is not less severe, but the Defendant already committed the crime of this case without being aware of the fact that he had been punished twice as a drug crime even though he had the record of punishment.

Considering the various circumstances, including the above circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, and circumstances after the commission of the crime, the lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable.

3. 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. Since it is apparent that "307,608 won" in the disposition of the court below is a clerical error in the "307,680 won" among the disposition of the court below, it is decided to correct it ex officio in accordance with Article 25 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure (in addition, "criminal facts" in the reasoning of the court below).

2. (b) (i) The date and time of the commission of the offence described in paragraph (1), “Is the date and Nov. 2, 2017,” is obvious that it is a clerical error in the “Is the date and Nov. 1, 2016,” and is corrected to dismiss it.