2. The fact that the judgment defendant recognized the crime and reflects it is reasonable to consider.

However, the defendant has a past record of criminal punishment twice for the same crime. Nevertheless, the defendant again commits the crime of this case during the same repeated crime period; the defendant committed the crime of this case because the number of times the defendant administered or provided narcotics is not many; the crime of this case is serious; the court below sentenced to the sentencing guidelines 1 for the sentencing guidelines [the scope of recommended punishment] under the aggravated area (1 year and six months to four years), (1 year and six years), (2) before the same type [the specially aggravated person] under the aggravated area (1 year and six months to four years), (2) before the same offense [the scope of recommended punishment] under the aggravated area (1 year to three years of suspended sentence] under the aggravated area (1 year to three years of suspended sentence); the defendant's punishment under the aggravated area (1 year to six years of suspended sentence); the defendant's punishment under the aggravated area (1 year to six years of suspended sentence; the defendant's punishment under the same subparagraph to six years to six years of suspended sentence; and the defendant's punishment under the following circumstances may not be imposed for six months to six months;

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. It is so decided as per Disposition.