2. The circumstances favorable to the defendant are that the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case and reflected in depth, that the defendant did not have the same criminal power, and that he actively cooperated in narcotics investigation such as informing the investigation agency of so-called upper lines.

However, the court below seems to have already determined a punishment in consideration of the above favorable circumstances. This case is controlled when the defendant administered phiphonephones over four times and possessed approximately 0.17 grams. As such, narcotics crimes are very serious and harmful to society and home due to toxicity, etc., and thus, there is a need to strictly punish them. Although there is no criminal power for the same kind of crime, it is up to nine times (five times suspension of execution, one time suspension of execution, and three times of fines) the criminal power of the defendant has not been imposed, and in particular, the defendant committed the crime of this case during the period of repeated offense, such as the defendant committed the crime of this case, it is unreasonable to deem that it is too unreasonable to the extent that the sentence imposed by the court below should be reversed, taking into account all the sentencing conditions presented in the argument of this case, such as the defendant's age, family relation, criminal record, character and conduct, environment, motive and method of the crime, the motive and circumstance of the crime, and the result of sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Committee.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.