The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s imprisonment (one year and six months of imprisonment, confiscation, and collection) is too unreasonable.

2. If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the court below, and the sentencing of the court below 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 lower court determined the sentence against the Defendant by comprehensively taking into account the favorable circumstances and unfavorable conditions for the Defendant.

The circumstance that the defendant asserts as the reason for appeal (such as the conflict of interest, cooperation in investigation, etc.) seems to have already been considered in the sentencing process of the court below.

In addition, there is no new change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below in the trial.

In full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime related to narcotics even during the period of repeated crimes, even though the Defendant was punished for narcotics crimes; (b) the Defendant committed again the instant crime related to narcotics; and (c) the volume of narcotics handled is considerable; and (d) the Defendant’s character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime were committed, taking into account the circumstances cited as the grounds for appeal, the lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.