The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below against the defendant on the summary of the reasons for appeal (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant acknowledges all of the instant crimes, reflects on, and expresses his will to do so.

In order to arrest the accomplice, there was an active cooperation in the investigation, and there was also an additional public letter of investigation to the effect that "the defendant urged the person who committed the crime of narcotics to cooperate in the investigation related to the arrest of narcotics."

However, the crime of this case is not very good in light of the number of crimes, period, and quantity of philophones handled, and the responsibility for the crime of this case is heavy.

It is judged that the defendant did not merely administer philophones, but did not know about the distribution thereof, and that the defendant again committed each of the crimes of this case without being aware of the same criminal record.

In full view of the aforementioned circumstances, comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances, the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

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