The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

A certificate of 0.54g of seized Metepis.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) Although the Defendant was in a state of having lost or weak ability to discern things at the time of committing the instant crime, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (one year of imprisonment, one year of confiscation, and one million won of surcharge) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s mental disorder argument, it is recognized that the Defendant was in a state of drinking alcohol at the time of the instant crime.

However, in light of the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant’s behavior and attitude revealed before and after the commission of the instant crime, etc., the Defendant was unable to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime.

It does not seem that there was or was a weak state.

Therefore, the defendant's mental disorder is without merit.

B. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor, the Defendant’s confession and reflects the instant crime is favorable to the Defendant.

However, in full view of the fact that narcotics-related crimes are not good in terms of social harm and the risk of recidivism, that the amount of narcotics that the defendant purchased and possessed is not much significant, that the defendant has already been punished several times for the same kind of crime, and that the defendant commits the crime of this case during the period of repeated crimes for the same kind of crime, as well as the criminal punishment and equity with regard to other crimes similar to the crime of this case, as well as other criminal punishment conditions of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive and circumstance of each of the crimes of this case, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the court below's punishment is too

Therefore, the prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing is justified.