All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The punishment sentenced by the first instance court to the summary of the grounds for appeal (one year for each defendant) is too unreasonable;

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The instant crime is likely to be subject to criticism in light of the influence of the Defendants, who are not entitled to handle drugs, such as injection and ice medication, which are prescription drugs that may involve side effects, on national health and hygiene, frequency of the crime, period of the crime, profits acquired, etc.

In order to avoid tracking by the investigation agency, there is also no way to commit the crime such as using a phiphone and selling the Defendants’ personal information so as not to reveal the identity of the Defendants.

Defendants constitute a repeated crime of this kind.

In addition, considering the following factors, the sentence imposed by the first instance court, including the age, character and conduct, the environment, and the degree of participation and role of the Defendants, and all the sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments of the first instance court and the party hearing, cannot be deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable to regard the sentence imposed by the first instance court within the reasonable scope

3. In conclusion, since all of the defendants' appeals are without merit, they are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.