2. The crime of this case is recognized that the defendant administered philophones once even though he is not a narcotics handler. It is recognized that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflects the criminal act of this case, under regular medical treatment, and shows the will of medicine, and that the defendant has old parents to support.

However, the Defendant had been sentenced once to a suspended sentence and twice as a sentence due to drug crimes, and even if he had been punished for a repeated crime due to drug crimes, he had come to commit the crime in this case, and the quality of such crime is not good, and in light of the result of the Defendant’s maternity appraisal, etc., it seems that isolation from society for a certain period of time is not necessary. Narcotics crimes cause decliation of individuals, homes, society and human society as a whole, and thus need to be punished strictly in that they are social ties beyond individual criminal acts, and other various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, motive, means and consequence of the crime in this case, the circumstances after the crime, etc., and the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and the theory of changes, are considered as inappropriate.

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.

Provided, That the burden of litigation costs shall be governed by the proviso of Article 186 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.