2. It is recognized that the Defendant: (a) was aware of such circumstances as the confession of the instant crime and reflects his mistake in depth; (b) the Defendant actively cooperated in the investigation by informing other narcotics-related offenders; (c) the Defendant did not have any criminal record of the same kind; and (d) the Defendant agreed with two victims of the instant crime; (b) it appears that the lower court had already been considered in sentencing.

In addition, the crime of this case was committed in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant purchased phiphones on five occasions; (b) purchased phiphones on four occasions; (c) mediated the sale and purchase of phiphones; and (d) committed assaulting two victims on the road; (b) in light of the method and content of the crime, the crime was considerably poor in light of the nature of the crime; (c) the crime related to narcotics not only caused the body and mind of an individual but also caused harm to the public health and other crimes; (d) it is necessary to punish the offender with severe adverse effects in society; (e) equity in sentencing and sentencing with the case of the same and similar type; and (e) the Defendant had the history of criminal punishment three times in Korea; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, the motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime; and (e) the circumstances after the crime, etc., it is not recognized that the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is not accepted.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.