2. In light of the circumstances that led to the instant crime, such as the Defendant’s confession and mistake of all the facts of the crime including the source of phiphones, the Defendant did not have any criminal record related to phiphones, and the Defendant’s married wife and his family members wanted to have the Defendant’s wife and endeavor to prevent recidivism. However, in 2008, the Defendant again committed the instant crime even though there was a criminal record of the same kind of crime subject to the suspended sentence due to the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (marith) in 2008, and the fact that the Defendant arranged the sale and purchase of phiphonephones and performed administration by himself, and other circumstances that are the conditions of sentencing as indicated in the records, such as the motive and circumstance leading to the instant crime, the circumstances before and after the commission of the crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, occupation, occupation, and family relationship, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.