The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

The 16-year public prosecutor's office of Changwon District which has been seized.

1. Improper sentencing for each of the reasons for appeal;

2. The judgment below held that the crime of narcotics requires strict punishment and eradication in light of the addiction of narcotics and the social harm of narcotics, and the defendant repeated the same crime even during the period of suspension of execution due to the violation of the Narcotics Control Act, and there are many times of providing or trading phiphones, and in particular there are no experience of administering narcotics.

In light of the fact that the nature of the crime is extremely poor, such as allowing a person to drink drinking beverages containing phiphones, the fact that the damage of the theft case was not recovered, the defendant divided his mistake and reflects his fault, and the fact that six persons are arrested in cooperation with the investigation, such as informing the person who committed the crime of narcotics, etc., the sentence was imposed by taking into account the following factors: the defendant's age, sex behavior, environment, motive and circumstance leading to each of the crimes of this case, the means and consequence thereof, and the circumstances after the crime.

As pointed out by the prosecutor in the grounds of appeal, the court below's punishment is somewhat unreasonable in light of the following: although it is recognized that the defendant committed clopon medication as well as copon medication, provision and sale, and many other parties, but the defendant made every effort to recover the damage by mutual consent with the victim of the larceny case, the defendant's intention not to repeat the crime, and the defendant filed a complaint with the friendship that the defendant recommended the defendant to not repeat the crime, and two drug offenders were additionally arrested at the trial on the basis of the information provided by the defendant, and four additional narcotics crimes were being investigated by the defendant after informing the victim of the drug case in the trial.

Therefore, the defendant's argument is reasonable and the prosecutor's argument is without merit.

3. Thus, the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is remanded after pleading.