A. In light of the fact that the judgment of the court of first instance has no record of punishment against the Defendant for narcotics crimes, the crime of this case is only a single penphone medication, the Defendant voluntarily surrenders himself, and the Defendant does not commit a crime in depth and is living in good faith as the most faithfully, etc., the punishment (six months of imprisonment) sentenced by the court of first instance is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the fact that the crime of this case against the judgment of the court below of the second instance is only two penphone medications, and that the defendant is in depth of his mistake, the punishment (four months of imprisonment) sentenced by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. Although this Court held the first and second judgments concurrently, each of the crimes in the judgment of the court below does not constitute a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, it is unnecessary to determine a single sentence for this. [The crimes in the judgment of the court below in the second instance are only the concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act with the crimes of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violence, etc. (a deadly Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily

As to the grounds for appeal against the judgment of the court below, it is inevitable to sentence the defendant to commit the crime of this case during the period of suspended execution due to a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapon, etc.).

Other factors favorable or unfavorable to the Defendant, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the offense, and all the sentencing circumstances indicated in the instant records and arguments, including circumstances after the offense, compared to the reasons for sentencing of the lower judgment, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable even in light of the various circumstances asserted by the Defendant as the reasons for appeal.

(b) 2.