beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s sentence (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. The lower court determined a sentence within the scope of the recommended sentence of the sentencing guidelines set by the sentencing committee of the Supreme Court, considering the following favorable circumstances: (i) narcotics crimes are committed under the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant: (i) not only have the body and mind of an individual, but also have the health of the people, and are likely to lead to other crimes, and thus have high probability of leading to such other crimes; (ii) the amount of marijuana imported by the Defendant reaches a considerable degree; and (iii) the Defendant committed the instant crimes even though having been sentenced four times of sentence and one suspended sentence of punishment for the same crime; and (iv) the Defendant is both recognized and against the Defendant; and (iii) the seizure of the total amount of imported marijuana and has not been distributed in Korea.
The sentencing of the court below seems to have been determined appropriately by fully taking into account the above various circumstances, and there is no special change in circumstances that are different from the sentencing conditions of the court below until the trial is held.
In light of the fact that the family members and the branch members of the defendant want to be the wife of the defendant, and other various sentencing conditions as shown in the arguments, such as the defendant's age, sexual conduct, environment, family relation, criminal records, criminal records, circumstances after the crime, and the result, it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable to avoid the reasonable scope of discretion.
Defendant’s assertion is without merit.
3. 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 groundless.