2. The crime of this case is deemed to have been committed by the Defendant with respect to the sale, receipt, possession, and medication of philophones, and the quantity or frequency of administered philophones handled by the Defendant, and the quality of the crime is not less than those of the Defendant.

In addition, it is necessary to eradicate narcotics crimes as serious crimes that cause serious harm to society.

However, there are favorable circumstances for the defendant to take into account the circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant, as a new citizen, without sufficiently recognizing the sex of the harm of narcotics, was caused to the crime of this case, and that there are some circumstances considering the background of the crime; most of the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflects his mistake in depth; the defendant has no record of crime other than the crime of this case; and the defendant has contributed to cooperation in the investigation by cooperating with the arrest of other narcotics criminals; and the defendant's wife and person wishing to take the action against the defendant.

In full view of the Defendant’s age, family relation, criminal record, sexual intercourse, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and method of the crime, circumstances after the crime, sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court sentencing committee, and all of the sentencing conditions stated in the records and arguments, together with these circumstances, the prosecutor’s assertion is without merit, since the sentence imposed by the lower court is too uneasible and unfair.

3. According to the conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.