The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment, 1 year and 2 months, confiscation, additional collection KRW 996,00) imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them. Although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to reverse the judgment of the first instance court solely on the ground that it is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court, and to refrain from imposing a sentence that does not differ from

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). It is recognized that the Defendant recognized each of the instant crimes and reflects the fact that the Defendant made an active statement with respect to the upper line to an investigative agency, and that four narcotics offenders are arrested by the Defendant.

However, in light of the amount, frequency, etc. of philophones purchased, administered, or possessed by the defendant (eight times, medication: 11 times, possession: 11 times, etc.), etc., the criminal defendant has a significant record of having been sentenced one time to imprisonment with prison labor and a suspended sentence due to the same kind of crime, etc., narcotics-related crimes are highly likely to repeat a crime due to their toxicity, etc., and are highly harmful to individuals and society, so it is necessary to strictly punish them. Since there is no special change of circumstances that may change the punishment of the court below after the sentence of the court below, there is no change of circumstances that make it possible to change the punishment of the court below, and all of the sentencing factors indicated in the records and arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, circumstances of each crime of this case, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the court below

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

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.