2. The Defendant, by recognizing all of the instant crimes, appears not only to cooperate in the investigation but also to repent of his mistake.

The defendant cooperationd with the investigation of narcotics-related crimes such as T.

The defendant voluntarily and actively experienced the intention of treatment.

It seems that the economic situation of the defendant is not good.

However, the defendant sold five g of philophones for 1.43 million won, and administered and possessed a philophones, and the responsibility for the crime is not easy.

In particular, narcotics-related crimes are not likely to be exposed due to their characteristics, and they are likely to have a high risk of recidivism, and they are likely to have a negative impact on society as a whole due to declimatic toxicity.

All the defendants have a record of criminal punishment for ten times (seven times of punishment, two times of suspension of execution, and one time of fine), and four times of which are the same criminal records as those of each of the crimes of this case.

In addition, even if the defendant's age, career, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, social relation, motive and circumstance of the crime, method and consequence of the crime, etc. are added to all the sentencing factors indicated in the records and arguments, there is no new circumstance to deem that the sentencing conditions of the court below against the defendant have been changed in the first instance court, and it is not determined that the sentencing of the court below is too unfair because it exceeds the reasonable discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is groundless.