2. It is recognized that the circumstances such as the Defendant’s confessions all of the instant crimes and reflects his mistake.

However, the crime of this case is deemed to have been administered by the defendant two times more than 0.03 g, and about 0.05 g and 0.3 g and 0.3 g., the crime of this case is highly poor in light of the method and contents of the crime. The defendant committed the crime of this case at once a sentence is sentenced to one of the crimes of the same kind and one of the suspended execution, even though there is no special circumstances or change of circumstances that may be newly considered after the decision of the court below was made, and the sentencing balance between the sentencing with the same and similar cases of the defendant, age, sex, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, circumstances after the crime is committed, etc., and the sentence imposed by the court below for each of the crimes of this case falls under the scope of punishment under the sentencing guidelines, and the scope of punishment under the sentencing guidelines: (a) imprisonment with prison labor for each of the crimes of this case falls under the scope of punishment for the last 1 to 20 years; and (b) imprisonment with prison labor for each of this case falls under the basic scope of punishment of 1 to 3 months.

In full view of the fact that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable because it is too large.

Therefore, we cannot accept the defendant's above assertion.

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 (Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, however, the judgment of the court below shall be corrected to “the pertinent Article of the Act and the choice of punishment” in Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.