2. It is recognized that the Defendant recognized each of the instant crimes and against his mistake, and the fact that the Defendant voluntarily surrendered to an investigative agency with the husband with respect to the crime of medication of phiphones.

However, the crime of this case is a case where the defendant committed one time the crime of phiphone medication and the crime of purchase of phiphonephones in light of the addiction to narcotics and the harm caused by the administration of narcotics, etc., it is necessary to strictly punish and eradicate the crime of phiphones. As above, the crime of this case was committed in the course of self-denunciation of the crime of phiphone medication, and the location of the phiphones again was unknown during the course of the crime of undetaineding the crime of phiphones, and further committed the crime of purchasing the phiphones during that period, and the result of the buphones seems to be less easily than the degree of phiphone addiction, considering the fact that the defendant had the record of criminal punishment including the punishment of phiphones, and the defendant had the record of criminal punishment already been imposed several times including the punishment of phiphones, the defendant's age, sex, environment, method and method of crime, the fairness in sentencing with all kinds and similar sentencing cases as shown in the oral argument, and the scope of guidelines for sentencing.

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.

Provided, That the burden of litigation costs shall be governed by the proviso of Article 186 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.