The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment, 1 year and 6 months, confiscation, additional collection 134,616) imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant purchased philophones once, administered them once, and possessed them once, and it cannot be deemed that the responsibility for the crime is very heavy.

The defendant seems to have purchased philophones for medication.

The Defendant appears not only to cooperate in the investigation but also to repent of his mistake by recognizing all of the crimes in this case.

The Defendant cooperationd in the investigation of narcotics related crimes against C.

It seems that the health status of the defendant is not good.

The defendant is under the influence of provoking the intention of provoking.

The defendant's friendship or the defendant's wife appeals against the defendant.

However, it is not easy to detect narcotics-related crimes due to their characteristics, and the risk of recidivism is high, as well as negative impacts on society as a whole due to declimatic toxicity, etc., so strict punishment is required.

The Defendant committed each of the crimes of this case during the period of repeated crime due to the previous violation.

All the defendants have a record of criminal punishment on nine occasions (seven times of punishment, and two times of fines), and four times of which are the same criminal records as each of the crimes of this case.

In addition, even if the defendant's age, career, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, social relation, motive and circumstance of the crime, method and consequence of the crime, etc. are added to all the sentencing factors indicated in the records and arguments, there is no new circumstance to deem that the sentencing conditions of the court below against the defendant have been changed due to the fact that the sentencing of the court below is too unfair because it goes beyond the scope of reasonable discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed on the ground that it is without merit.