The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor, confiscation, and collection 720,00 won) imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant appears to have purchased phiphones for administration.

The Defendant appears not only to cooperate in the investigation but also to repent of his mistake by recognizing all of the crimes in this case.

Defendant did not have any criminal record identical to each of the crimes in this case.

It seems that the economic situation of the defendant is not good.

The defendant is under the influence of provoking the intention of provoking.

The mother of the defendant appeals against the defendant.

However, narcotics-related crimes are not easy to detect due to their characteristics, and they are highly likely to repeat crimes, and they are likely to have a negative impact on society as a whole due to declimatic toxicity.

The defendant purchased philophones twice and administered 15 times, and the responsibility for the crime is minor, but is not easy.

The Defendant committed each of the crimes of this case during the period of repeated crime.

The defendants have a career of being subject to criminal punishment on nine occasions (five times of punishment, five times of fines, four times of fines).

In addition, even if the defendant's age, career, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, social relation, motive and circumstance of the crime, method and consequence of the crime, etc. are added to all the sentencing factors indicated in the records and arguments, there is no new circumstance to deem that the sentencing conditions of the court below against the defendant have been changed in the first instance court, and it is not determined that the sentencing of the court below is unfair because it goes beyond reasonable discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed on the ground that it is without merit.