The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the lower court (a punishment of one year, confiscation, and collection KRW 300,000) is too unreasonable.

2. The crime of this case is recognized that the defendant received and administered philophones even though he is not a narcotics handler, and that the defendant is fully aware of and reflects the crime of this case, and that there is no record of punishment for the same crime.

However, the crime of narcotics causes the degradation of individuals, homes, society, and humanity as a whole, and thus requires strict punishment in that it is the social pathology beyond individual criminal acts, and in light of the result of the Defendant’s maternity appraisal, etc., it seems that the degree of addiction might not be weak and need isolation from society for a certain period of time. The Defendant seems to have been forced to administer narcotics for a certain period of time, and the Defendant appears to have been forced to administer narcotics to G rather than to administer narcotics to himself/herself, as a result of the G’s maternity appraisal, it is confirmed as “the voice”, as a result of G’s maternity appraisal, and the fact that there was a dispute over the problem of money with G, the lower court’s sentencing based on this assertion is unfair.

However, in light of the fact that G’s statement on the process of administering narcotics by the Defendant at the time of the instant case, the Defendant’s statement on the condition of administering narcotics, etc. contains very specific and detailed contents that it is difficult to talk without facing the situation, and thus, the credibility of the statement is high, and the quantity of medication, frequency of medication, personal body quality, hair, artificial (e.g., chrophones contained in the hair, chrophones) and environmental causes may be lost and the phiphones contained in the mephones may not be detected as a result of appraisal. The above assertion by the Defendant is without merit.

As the defendant has been punished about 15 times for various crimes, such as gambling and injury, it seems that the awareness of compliance is weak as a whole.