The judgment of the first instance shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

1,817,00 won shall be collected from the defendant.

1. The punishment sentenced by the first instance court to the summary of the grounds for appeal (limited to four years of imprisonment and additional collection) is too unreasonable;

2. Determination of narcotics crimes need to be strictly punished because they are highly likely to cause serious harm to individuals and society.

In particular, marijuana imports have been systematically and repeatedly conducted three times, and a large quantity of about 1.8 kilograms in total in the transfer of imported marijuana.

Therefore, the defendant requires strict punishment corresponding to this.

However, considering the fact that the defendant has no history of punishment in Korea, and the defendant is recognized as all the objective facts of the crime of this case, and is against the defendant, the scope of punishment for the import of marijuana falls under the basic areas of the defendant's age, character and conduct, family environment, family relationship, circumstances after the crime, and the range of punishment for the recommendation according to the sentencing guidelines, each of the following: the scope of punishment for the import of marijuana falls under the basic areas of category 2, such as the manufacture, etc. of narcotics crimes, and the scope of imprisonment for two or four years. Thus, the scope of punishment for the recommendation according to the sentencing guidelines for multiple crimes falls under two to seven years (4 years: 4 years x 1/2 x 1/3). However, since the minimum of the statutory punishment for the recommendation punishment is lower than the minimum of the statutory punishment, the scope of punishment for the recommendation that was modified according to the minimum of the statutory punishment for the punishment for the crime of this case shall be two years to

In full view of all various circumstances, including sentencing cases in similar cases, equity in punishment among accomplices, and equity in punishment among the defendants, in particular, that the main mother and child E, who had caused not only the defendants but also I to smuggling, was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for four years in the Seoul Central District Court 2015Kahap232 case on July 3, 2015, etc., the sentence imposed by the first instance court on the defendant is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is justified.

3. As such, the appeal by the defendant is reasonable, and the judgment of the first instance is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the appeal is again decided as follows.

In other words,