The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

10,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal in this case’s sentencing conditions, the lower court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment and one hundred thousand won of surcharge) is too unreasonable.

2. In the case of medication of narcotics, there is a great need for punishment for serious crimes that injure the social and national soundness due to their toxicity, and the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime of the same kind without being aware of the fact that he had committed three times a prison sentence, or one time a suspended sentence and that he committed the instant crime.

However, in light of the fact that the defendant divided his mistake into three or more months of detention life, and tried to return narcotics to society in good faith, the amount of penphones administered by the defendant is not large, the defendant transferred to the police station upon receipt of a report from her mother to her mother and return to the first place, and voluntarily inform the police of the fact that her cellphone medication is carried out to the police station during temporary protection, and the defendant's mother, wife, the head of her mother and the head of her body want to support the defendant, and other various matters specified in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, which are conditions for sentencing, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, etc., as stated in the records and arguments of this case, the sentence of the court below is somewhat inappropriate.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act and the defendant's appeal is with merit.

[Dao-written judgment] The criminal facts of the defendant recognized by this court and the summary of the evidence are as shown in the corresponding column of the judgment below, except for the alteration of the "Metea-crympis" at the last stage of the judgment of the court below to "Metea-crympis". Thus, it is true in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.