The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The grounds for appeal (a year of imprisonment and an additional collection) by the lower court are too unreasonable.

2. The court below determined a punishment within the recommended range according to the sentencing guidelines established by the Supreme Court, taking into account all the circumstances revealed in the trial process of this case, including the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, and family relationship, where the defendant's mistake is recognized, and the crime of giving and receiving judgment constitutes minor cases than the general crime of giving and receiving, where it is more favorable that the risk of recidivism is high, social harm is very high, and thus, the punishment of narcotics is strictly punished for serious crimes, and in the case of philphones, it is more toxic and harmful to other narcotics than other narcotics.

The grounds for unfair sentencing alleged by the Defendant appear to be the circumstances that the lower court had already taken into account when determining the Defendant’s punishment. The lower court’s punishment is reasonable within the reasonable scope of discretion, and there are no circumstances suggesting that the said sentencing conditions have been changed in the appellate court.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion cannot be accepted, since the court below's punishment is too heavy.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.