The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

The seized white paper 1.84g (No. 1) and mash.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years of imprisonment, confiscation, additional collection of KRW 4,559,00) is too unreasonable.

2. Before determining the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, according to the statement made by the Defendant in the court of first instance, the general contents of the case of the Supreme Court, and each entry in the copy of the judgment, the Defendant, at the Busan District Court on December 5, 2018, sentenced six months to imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 13, 2018. As above, the crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. and each of the crimes of this case, which became final and conclusive, are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the punishment for each of the crimes of this case is determined at the same time in consideration of equity and cases under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the lower

3. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, on the grounds of ex officio reversal as seen above, and the following is again decided after pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts constituting an offense and the summary of the evidence acknowledged by this court are as follows: “The person who has completed the execution of the sentence” in the first head part of the judgment of the court below as “the person who has completed the execution of the sentence,” and Article 1-C of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. at the Busan District Court on December 5, 2018, sentenced six months to imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. at the Busan District Court on December 13, 2018.”

Except for adding "1.76g" in the first sentence to "1.29g", and the summary of evidence to "the defendant's trial statement at the court, the general contents of the case, and the copy of the judgment" in the previous conviction as stated in the judgment, it is identical to the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, it is true in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.