The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as indicated in the facts of the crime in the above judgment of the court below, administered D himself with the knowledge that D contains a philophone, not allowing D to flow a philophone with water while gathering that D philophones are melting water, and denies its criminal act with the spirit of D.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (one year and four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the court below's decision on the assertion of mistake of facts and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the trial court, i.e., that: (a) D, after drinking beer and water from the defendant at an investigative agency, it is difficult to find out the process of being provided with phiphones by the defendant; (b) the defendant made a concrete and consistent statement on the substitution of the fact that he had been aware that phiphones were made twice at the later time in the investigation; and (c) the defendant first asserted that D had mental problems without the defendant's knowledge about D's phiphone medication at first in relation to D's phiphone medication; (d) he consented to the phiphone medication, and reported himself with the mental disorder of D; and (e) he asserted that D's statement was not consistent and that the credibility of the defendant's statement against a reasonable common sense is diminished (the defendant is also not directly related to D's mental disorder, but it cannot be acknowledged that the defendant's statement was directly related to D's crime.

B. A narcotics-related crime on the assertion of unfair sentencing is not less severe in terms of social harm and risk of recidivism, and narcotics.