The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (two months of imprisonment, confiscation, additional collection of KRW 1,416,00) is too unreasonable.

2. The following circumstances are recognized: (a) the Defendant recognized each of the instant crimes and reflected against the Defendant; (b) cooperation with the investigative agency to ensure that the investigation of the relevant accomplices is conducted (the trial record 50,51 pages); (c) the Defendant has no same criminal record; and (d) is the most supporting his/her father and wife; and (e) the wife wanting to take the Defendant’s wife against the Defendant.

However, the crime of this case is not limited to the purchase of phiphonephones by the defendant, and provides part of them to I, F, etc. without being limited to the administration thereof by himself, and in light of the method of crime and the quantity of philophones purchased, etc., the crime of this case is administered together with L who is a minor, and there is no reason to take into account the circumstances after the crime, such as the attitude (Investigation Records No. 181) in the course of investigation, etc., and there is no other reason to consider in the process of investigation, such as the defendant's age, environment, occupation and family relation, all the sentencing conditions in the records and arguments of this case, and

1. Type 1 (Violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc.) basic area and one-year imprisonment, including the trading, arrangement, etc. of the narcotics crime group;

2. Type II (marith of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc.) basic area and one-year imprisonment with prison labor for the category II (marith of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., malith of the Act).

3. Second category (math class) of narcotics crime: Basic area, imprisonment with prison labor for 1 to 2 years (math class (math class, math (b) and (c), etc.) of the Act on the Control of Narcotics).

4. In full view of the final sentence scope of imprisonment with prison labor according to the standards for handling multiple crimes, the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is too unreasonable, as it is too unreasonable.

3. According to the conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant is without merit.