2. The lower court, based on the circumstances that the Defendant led to each of the crimes, the Defendant’s confessions, the treatment and support for addiction crimes, the favorable circumstances that have no record of being punished for the same kind of crime, the Defendant committed the second narcotics crime after being investigated as a prior narcotics case, and the Defendant had a record of being punished twice as a suspended sentence due to the suspended sentence, determined the sentence to be sentenced within the scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines (the suspended sentence of three years in the year and June, and the additional collection).

The reason for the improper sentencing (responding to the dependent, employment, self-denunciation, and reflect) alleged by the defendant was that the court below had already considered the circumstances or changed in the sentencing conditions when determining the sentence against the defendant.

Considering the circumstances that are difficult to see, the sentence of the court below is reasonable within the reasonable scope of discretion when taking into account various sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive and means of the crime, and circumstances after the crime.

Defendant

The argument is without merit.

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.