2. The crime of this case is recognized that the Defendant administered philophones twice even though he is not a narcotics handler. The Defendant recognized the crime of this case for the first time and reflects it, the Defendant appears to have some circumstances to consider the background or motive leading to the crime of this case, and the Defendant’s health condition is not good.

However, the defendant has been punished several times for the same crime, and the crime of this case was committed without being aware of even though it was a repeated crime due to the same crime, and the nature of the crime is not less than that of the crime of this case. Narcotics crimes cause the degradation of individuals, families, society, and human beings, and thus need to be punished strictly in light of the fact that it is an individual's social pathology beyond the individual criminal act, and other various circumstances, including the defendant's age, sex behavior, motive, means, and consequence of the crime of this case, the circumstances after the crime, etc., which are conditions for sentencing, do not seem to be unfair since the sentence imposed by the court below is too excessive.

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.