A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

2. Considering that the nature of the instant crime is not good and that the Defendant has the same criminal record, strict punishment against the Defendant is necessary.

However, in consideration of the fact that the defendant was living in prison for a period of not less than three months, the number of crimes was limited to one time, and the transfer of penphones traded by the defendant, the criminal records of the defendant were old for about 20 years, and there was no criminal records of the defendant, and other conditions of sentencing as shown in the arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the court below's punishment is too unreasonable. Thus, the above argument by the defendant is justified.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the judgment below is ruled again as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court is identical to the facts stated in the corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 60 (1) 2, Article 4 (1) 1, and subparagraph 3 (b) of Article 2 of the Act on the Selection and Management of Narcotics, Etc. concerning facts constituting an offense (the choice of imprisonment with prison labor);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on the observation of protection;

1. The proviso to Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act;