2. Determination may be taken into account as sentencing materials favorable to the Defendant that the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime, the fact that the Defendant was against the Defendant’s confession of the instant crime, the fact that the Defendant was to provide support for one-time medication, and the fact that the Defendant is a minor.

However, the Defendant has two times the history of punishment for the same drug crime, and in particular, within three years after being sentenced to two months of imprisonment for the same drug crime on June 3, 2015, and was released on December 8, 2015, it constitutes a repeated crime and constitutes a repeated crime. In addition, there are several records of punishment (three times of the suspension of the execution of imprisonment and ten times of fines) as a result of this type of crime, and there are some records of the punishment that are punished several times as a result of this type of crime (ten times of the suspension of the execution of the sentence). In addition, in light of the results of the maternity appraisal, it seems that the dependence on phiphonephones is significant in terms of all the sentencing conditions in the records and arguments of this case, such as the Defendant’s age, environment, and health status

3. Accordingly, 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.