The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

In light of the overall circumstances of this case, the punishment imposed by the court below (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Considering the circumstances that the defendant was placed in the suspicion of a crime due to the unexpected family environment of the defendant, and that led to the continuous criminal act without any special social experience, even though the defendant was a repeated crime period and had the same criminal records, the defendant repeated the crime by administering three times the Mepter, and considering all the sentencing conditions of the defendant, such as his age, family relation, criminal records, criminal records, character and conduct, environment, means and method of the crime, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the punishment imposed by the court below is deemed reasonable and too unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

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

However, among the "application of statutes" of the judgment below, "Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act" is an error of "proviso of Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act" and "Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act" is an omission of "Article 334 (1) of the Provisional Payment Order" below "Article 67 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc.," and it is obvious that it is an omission of "Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act". Thus,

.