The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Improper sentencing on the gist of reasons for appeal: The sentence of the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment and four years of suspended execution, etc.) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Improper sentencing of the relevant legal doctrine refers to cases where the sentence of the lower judgment is too heavy or too minor in light of the content of the specific case.

Where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the original judgment, and the sentencing of the original court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, the appellate court is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the original judgment.

On the other hand, the sentencing judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable limit of its discretion when comprehensively taking into account the conditions of sentencing as shown in the court below’s sentencing review process and the sentencing guidelines.

In a case where the appellate court’s sentencing determination is deemed unfair in light of the materials newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing review, the appellate court should reverse the judgment below’s unreasonable determination of the sentence (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). (b) The lower court’s sentence return to the instant case is too unreasonable in light of the content of the specific case.

1) The lower court: (a) under the circumstances favorable to the Defendant’s recognition of and reflect on the instant crime; (b) there was no record that the Defendant was punished for the same type of crime; and (c) the Defendant received or purchased marijuana or synthetic marijuana for the purpose of mere medication, not for distribution purposes; and (b) narcotics crimes are highly likely to cause harm and injury to society because they may cause another crime due to toxicity and saculism, etc.; and (c) the instant crimes are deemed to have received or purchased marijuana or synthetic marijuana in the Republic of Korea or the Philippines; and (d) the circumstances, details, frequency, etc. of the instant crimes are considered to have been taken over or administered.