The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (one year of imprisonment and additional collection) on the defendant is too unlimited and unfair.

2. It is recognized that the circumstances, such as the fact that the Defendant made a confession of the entire crime of this case and reflects his mistake, and that the investigation agency made a statement to the Defendant on the person who provided the Mepta (hereinafter “Handphone”) on the Defendant.

However, the crime of this case is deemed to have been administered twice by the defendant, approximately 0.05g on the one hand, and intruded upon the victim's residence. In light of the method and contents of the crime, etc., the crime of this case is considerably poor; the defendant has been sentenced four times of punishment due to drug crimes, one time of suspended execution, and one time of fine; in particular, on December 1, 201, the Busan District Court has been sentenced to three years of suspended execution as a crime of violation of the Narcotics Control Act; on May 24, 2013, the above judgment of suspended execution becomes effective after being sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime; and on February 25, 2015, the crime of this case is committed again during the period of repeated crime; the defendant has no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may be newly considered after the sentence was issued; and on the other hand, the defendant has no specific motive and extent of punishment; and on the other hand, the motive and extent of punishment of each of the crimes of this case;

point that is the lowest limit of this Act.