The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor, confiscation, and collection 200,000 won) imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant provided approximately 0.05 g of philophones free of charge, administered approximately 0.05 g of philophones, possessed one disposable injection machine containing a non-flophones, and the responsibility for the crime is not very heavy.

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

It seems that the health and economic conditions of the defendant are not good.

The defendant's live together appeal against the defendant's wife.

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 same criminal record.

All the defendants have a record of criminal punishment over 21 times (eight times of actual punishment, two times of suspended execution, and one-time of fine). Among them, nine times (eight times of actual punishment and one time of suspended execution) are criminal records of the same kind as each of the crimes in 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 in the first instance court, and it is not determined that the sentencing of the court below is unfair because it goes beyond 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.