The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the reasons for appeal (the penalty of 1 year and six months, 2,904,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. It is recognized that the defendant made a confession of all crimes and reflects the wrongness in the trial, and that the defendant has a family member who should support the defendant.

However, the crime of this case is not a good crime since it purchased psychotropic drugs four times for a period exceeding four months and provided marithal marijuana twice.

Since narcotics not only destroy the body and mind of individuals, but also cause social harm such as causing other crimes, it is necessary to severely punish crimes related to narcotics.

The defendant has a total of eight criminal records for the same kind of crime, and the crime of this case is committed in the period of repeated crime due to the same crime.

The defendant submitted a public confirmation for the first time, and the defendant cooperates with the investigation to enable four criminal suspects, such as R, etc. to be prosecuted, so such circumstance should be considered as grounds for mitigation of punishment against the defendant.

However, the crime of the above 4 persons is mainly related to the cultivation of marijuana (not more than a large quantity of cultivation) and delivery, which is more serious than the defendant's crime of this case.

shall not be deemed to exist.

In addition, one investigative agency is only a stage of investigation after the offender is committed against the above four persons, and it is difficult to view that the defendant has contributed to the investigation to the extent that it is possible to additionally file a criminal suit against the above four persons.

Ultimately, there is a "important investigation cooperation" to the extent that the punishment for narcotics crimes can be mitigated to the defendant.

Therefore, the above argument cannot be accepted.

In addition, the above circumstances and the defendant's age, sexual conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, etc., various sentencing conditions shown in the arguments in this case, and the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines set by the Supreme Court sentencing committee.