The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment, 1 year and 6 months, confiscation, 1,201, 431 additional collection) imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. The lower court determined that: (a) the Defendant received or purchased 16.07g and marijuana 100g of philophones and possessed them twice, administered or smoked them; (b) narcotics crimes do not easily detect due to their characteristics; and have high risk of recidivism; and (c) have high negative impacts on society as a result of decryptability and toxicity; and (d) considerable punishment is required; (c) the Defendant had already been sentenced four times as to narcotics crimes, but had served for the same kind of crime; (d) the Defendant went back to the instant crime after completing the execution of imprisonment for the same crime; and (e) the Defendant had a high possibility of criticism with regard to such repeated narcotics crimes; and (b) the Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes; and (b) took into account the fact that the Defendant took advantage of his mistake and penphones and marijuana that the Defendant received or purchased were confiscated; and (d) the Defendant has not been able to have handled them for the purpose of sale; and (e) the Defendant’s motive and behavior were not found in full consideration of the Defendant’s punishment.

In full view of the factors and guidelines for sentencing expressed in the sentencing review process of the lower court, the lower court’s determination of sentencing is not deemed to have exceeded the reasonable bounds of its discretion.

Furthermore, the court below's decision on the grounds of unfair sentencing alleged by the defendant in this court.