The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The reasoning of the appeal (one year of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment defendant recognized each of the crimes of this case and divided his mistake.

Social ties such as the parents of the defendant who want to take the action against the defendant are relatively close.

I seem to appear.

In the future, the defendant shows his intention to cut down the administration of phiphones, and there are extenuating circumstances such as indicating the possession of phiphones by the investigation agency.

However, it is necessary to strictly punish narcotics-related crimes not only because they avoid the body and mind of an individual due to their crypism, toxicity, etc., but also are highly likely to harm the health and social safety of the people.

Each of the crimes of this case is not only that the defendant administered or saw philophones, but also that he took part in the distribution and receipt of such philophones, and the quality of the crime is not weak.

In addition, each of the crimes in this case is a crime that occurred during the same period of suspension of execution, and its possibility of criticism is high.

Considering the various circumstances, including the above circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive for committing a crime, frequency of a crime, and circumstances after committing a crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable because it is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.