The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the Defendant’s act of purchasing and selling 0.5g phiphones at the place indicated in the facts charged on July 13, 2010, on the ground that the Defendant, around July 13, 2010, purchased and sold phiphones to D with the same background as that indicated in the facts charged, provided that, upon request of D and H for the purchase and sale of phiphones (i.e., to request phiphones from D, and talks with H., although H, H may use phiphones, but there was no deposit account under his own name, which was transferred phiphones to H with the Defendant’s deposit account, and then withdrawn the phiphones to himself. Therefore, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the purchase and sale of phiphones by misapprehending the legal doctrine on phiphones, which affected the Defendant’s act of buying and selling phiphones.

B. The sentence of imprisonment (one year and six months) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of legal principles, it is recognized that the defendant sold approximately KRW 0.5g of 0.5g of philopon to D in the circumstances as stated in paragraph (1) of the judgment of the court below, and this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. There are no circumstances to consider the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing, including: (a) the Defendant made a confession of most of the facts constituting the instant crime and made a statement that his mistake is divided in depth; and (b) the Defendant’s family members also wanting to take the Defendant’s preference while actively paying attention and leading the Defendant; (c) on the other hand, the Defendant had already been committed prior to each of the instant crimes.