The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the reasons for appeal (one year and two months of imprisonment, three months of imprisonment, confiscation and collection) 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 it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the circumstances alleged by the Defendant as an element of sentencing were revealed in the hearing process of the lower court and sufficiently considered. There was no particular change in the situation that is the condition of sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment.

In addition, even though the defendant had been previously punished several times for the same criminal records, the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case during the period of repeated crimes, and narcotics-related crimes are highly likely to repeat crimes and have a great harm to the individual society, and thus there is a need to strictly punish them. In full view of all the sentencing factors indicated in the arguments of this case, including the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, the background and motive leading to the crime of this case, circumstances before and after the crime of this case, the frequency of the crime of this case (4 times) and the frequency of the crime, etc., the sentencing of the court below is too excessive and so it cannot be said

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.