2. In lieu of the Defendants, the Defendants’ perception of and reflects the instant crime; the Defendants did not have any history of criminal punishment in the Republic of Korea prior to the instant crime; and the Defendants’ seizure of the penphone imported by the Defendants and did not actually distribute it during the time is favorable to the Defendants.

However, narcotics-related crimes are not easy to detect due to their characteristics, and the risk of recidivism is high, as well as highly harmful crimes that cause the whole society as well as individuals due to decryability, toxicity, etc., and their nature is very heavy.

In particular, in order to protect society and its members from narcotics crimes that have recently been rapidly expanded internationally and systematically, it is necessary to strictly cope with the import of narcotics, such as the instant crimes.

As a result of the instant crime, a large amount of philophones imported by the Defendants reached approximately 100g, and if such large-scale narcotics are distributed in Korea, negative impacts on social cancellation or national health cannot be deemed to be light.

In addition to these circumstances, considering the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the degree of the Defendants’ participation in the crime [Defendant A]. However, in light of the contents of the text message sent by the Defendants (as seen in Articles 121 through 125 of the Evidence Record), etc., it is deemed that Defendant A led the crime of this case] and the various conditions of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, including the contents of the text message given by the Defendants (as to the extent that Defendant A was considered to have led the crime of this case), and the scope of the recommended sentence presented by the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee (as to four to seven