Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. In light of the substance of the grounds for appeal in this case’s sentencing conditions, the lower court’s punishment (one hundred months of imprisonment and four hundred thousand won of collection) is too heavy (the Defendant) or is deemed unreasonable.

2. The circumstances are as follows: (a) the Defendant’s mistake is divided and reflected; (b) the amount of penphones offered for the commission of the crime is not much large; and (c) the Defendant actively cooperates with the investigation of the investigation agency to arrest the narcotics offender up to the trial; and (d) the Defendant actively cooperates with the investigation agency.

On the other hand, the defendant, without being aware of the fact that he committed each of the crimes of this case during the period of repeated crime due to the same crime, was committed, and the liability for such crime was not less severe, and the defendant administered penphones four times over a short period after purchasing penphones. The defendant seems to be dependent on hallucinogenic substances, and it is judged that such defendant needs to be isolated from the environments harmful to hallucinogenic substances for a certain period, etc., are elements for sentencing disadvantageous to the defendant.

The lower court appears to have determined the sentence by fully taking account of the above all the circumstances, and comprehensively taking account of all the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments in this case, the sentence imposed by the Defendant is appropriate, and is too heavy or less.

3. In conclusion, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since all of the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor are without merit. It is so decided