마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The decision of the court below against the defendant on the summary of the reasons for appeal (one year and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.). The Defendant appears to have recognized, depth, and reflect all of the instant crimes.
It seems clear social ties, such as arbitras, sons, and families have made efforts for the sake of the defendant's arbitrity and adaptation, appeal against the defendant, etc., and there is concern that the family's livelihood will be difficult if the detention of the defendant is prolonged due to the fact that the defendant has two children.
However, the lower court asserts that, considering all the above circumstances, it appears that the sentence was determined, and that there is no change in the special sentencing conditions at the time of the trial (the Defendant sent a picture to the injection machine to prove that he/she is a person who administers phiphones, and that it is not good to commit a crime, such as sending pictures taken by SNS and seeking a person who administers phiphones together, etc.) is unfair.
However, according to the records, the fact that the defendant colored a person who will administer SNS along with the phonephones can be sufficiently recognized, and whether White dust, which was inside the equipment of the photograph taken by the defendant, is a philophone or not, does not affect the determination of the quality of the crime. The above circumstances have a large number of criminal records, and the defendant was punished for the same crime, and again committed the crime of this case during the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor due to the crime of fabrication of public document for the repeated crime period, which was punished for the same crime, there is a high possibility of criticism in light of the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case again during the suspension of the execution of the punishment,