The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.

Seized evidence 1, 2, and 3 shall be confiscated.

1. The summary of the reasons for appeal is that the sentence imposed by the court below (one year of imprisonment; confiscation; additional collection of 239,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant, in the year 2014, was sentenced to three years of imprisonment with prison labor for the same kind of crime, and was subject to protection surveillance during the period of suspended execution, and was engaged in community service, but was also selling, providing, administering, and taking a lawsuit, and thus, the Defendant’s liability for the crime is not somewhat weak.

However, it seems that the defendant has led to the confession of the crime and against himself.

Demblingly appeal the ship's wife.

Since the defendant actively informed 3 persons who are narcotics-related crimes and detection of 3 persons among them, the defendant's cooperation in the investigation should be taken into account due to the reasons that the punishment is light.

In addition, in full view of various sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances before and after the crime, etc., the sentence of the court below is recognized to be unfair.

On the attached interest, the court below, in applying the sentencing guidelines, sentenced one year below the lower limit after deeming the sentencing guidelines as trading and deriving the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines for a period of at least one year and six months. However, if the sentencing guidelines are applied properly, the court below is the scope of the recommended punishment for a period of at least eight months.

In addition, according to the records of the second trial protocol of the court below, the court of the court of the court below can find the fact that the court of the court of the court below conducted the examination of evidence without the prosecutor's statement on the second trial date and closed the pleadings

In fact, the prosecutor made all statements.

Even if there is no evidence to acknowledge this, and the absolute probative value of the trial protocol should not be considered.

In addition, the judgment of the court below is also erroneous in violation of Article 285 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which affected the judgment.

3. If so, the defendant's appeal is justified.