The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

20,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, each crime of facts constituting the crime as stated in the judgment of the court below is in a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Thus, although the punishment is determined within the scope of a limited term of punishment pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, the court below found the defendant guilty of all of the crimes of this case and found the defendant guilty of a concurrent crime, and found the defendant guilty of omitting the weight of concurrent crimes. In this regard, the judgment of the court below

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is again decided as follows after oral argument.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are all the same as the corresponding columns of the judgment of the court below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., Articles 60 (1) 2, 4 (1) 1, and 2 subparagraph 3 (b) (the point of the administration of phiphones) of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., Articles 60 (1) 2, 4 (1) 1, and 2 subparagraph 3 (b) (the point of possession of phiphones) of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., and the choice of imprisonment for each sentence;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act to increase concurrent crimes;

1. Although the reason for sentencing under the proviso of Article 67 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (based on the market price of 100,000 won for a one-time medication) was committed for the same crime, the fact that the defendant committed repeatedly the crime of this case is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the defendant confessions the crime of this case and is against the defendant, and the defendant's reference is currently being affected by colonial cancer.