The appeal by the prosecutor is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months and 2 years of suspended execution) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the defendant is disadvantageous to the fact that the defendant has a record of being punished for the same kind of crime, in light of the quantity of philophone purchased and the number of times of medication.

However, there are extenuating circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant living under detention for two months in prison and commits a violation of his/her mistake in depth and actively cooperate in the investigation, that the defendant seems to have significantly good health conditions such as undergoing a simplified surgery around 2005 and that there is no record of punishment for the same crime after 190. The scope of the recommended sentence for the crime of this case according to the sentencing guidelines established by the Supreme Court Sentencing established by the Sentencing Commission is from 1 year to 3 years 1: 2 types, such as drug crime group, sale and purchase mediation, etc., determination of the recommended area (basic area), sentencing range (1 to 2 years): Group 2 types, such as drug crime group, trade mediation, etc., special swelves (i.e., sound area), determination of suspended sentence (i., area), basic sentencing range (i.e., year to 3 years), the final sentencing range (i., number of years to 3 years), the sentencing range (ii) year to 1 year to 20 years, etc.

3. The appeal filed by the prosecutor with the conclusion is groundless, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.