2. In full view of the following circumstances, the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is deemed appropriate in light of all of the following factors: the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relations, the frequency and amount of handling philophones, and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

The favorable circumstances: The crime related to narcotics was committed in the first instance and against the fact that each of the crimes of this case was recognized and reflected: The strict response is required as a crime that causes the degradation of individuals, families, and society as a whole; the amount and frequency of the penphone handled by the defendant was considerably large; the crime of selling phiphones was committed with professional driving, such as trading of phiphones with many people; the sales of phiphonephones was committed with high social risks, such as the mass production of addicts; the defendant was punished nine times in total, including imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime; the crime related to narcotics was not committed immediately after the release of the defendant, despite the fact that the defendant committed the crimes of this case, including imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime, and the response to the training of phiphones has been confirmed in the total amount of mephones.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is groundless.