The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal in this case’s sentencing conditions, the lower court’s imprisonment (one year of imprisonment and additional collection) is too unreasonable.

2. The crime of this case is an act of purchasing and administering phiphonephones at least twice each, and the fact that the defendant has repented and reflected the wrongness is an element of sentencing favorable to the defendant.

However, without being aware of the Defendant, even though he was in a repeated crime due to the same crime, the Defendant committed the instant crime, and the liability for such crime was not less severe, and the final judgment, which is a repeated crime, was committed during the period of repeated crime, and is also dependent on the Defendant’s philopon. In this respect, there is a need to isolate the Defendant from philopon for a certain period, and the lower court appears to have determined the punishment in full consideration of the aforementioned overall circumstances, and in full view of all the sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments of the instant case, it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

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.