The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal (one year and six 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 already punished several times for the same kind of crime, the defendant committed the crime in this case during the same repeated crime period, narcotics-related crimes are highly likely to repeat crimes due to their toxicity, etc. and are highly harmful to individuals and society, so that the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, the process and motive leading to the crime in this case, the frequency of the crime in this case (4 times), and the circumstances before and after the crime, etc., it cannot be said that the sentencing of the court below exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because it is too excessive.

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.