The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the court below was just in finding the Defendant guilty of each of the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning and did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.

In addition, examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the records, the lower court is justifiable to have determined that the Defendant’s purchase of phiphones on July 29, 2012 among the facts charged in the instant case and that the Defendant was not the same as the receipt of phiphones on July 28, 2012 among the facts charged in violation of the Narcotics Control Act, which was sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years on July 29, 2012 by the Daegu District Court 201Da5754, and the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years on June 28, 2012

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below erred by significantly deviating from the discretion of sentencing constitutes the allegation of unfair sentencing.

However, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.