The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the defendant's period of imprisonment with prison labor for not less than ten months (two years of suspended sentence), community service, 80 hours in general, 40 hours in attending pharmacologic treatment, and 2.1 million won in collection) imposed by the court below is unreasonable.

2. The gist of the instant crime is as follows: (a) the Defendant purchased marijuana over three occasions from January 201 to November 2015; (b) smoked on and around October 2016 and December 2016; and (c) possession of marijuana around August 30, 201.

In the case of narcotics-related crimes, it is not easy to detect them due to their characteristics, and the risk of recidivism is high, and it has a negative impact on the whole society as well as the relevant individuals due to decliability, toxicity, etc.

The nature of the instant crime cannot be considered to be less than that of the Defendant’s crime, taking into account the number of crimes (six times in total), the quantity of the hemp purchased (a total of about 21g per 7g) and the period of the instant crime.

The above is the circumstances unfavorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, the Defendant viewed all of the instant crimes as reflective light.

The defendant has no criminal records of imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment or criminal records of the same kind.

The defendant's purchase of marijuana seems to have been aimed at smoking, and it is difficult to find out the circumstances that the defendant distributed marijuana purchased.

The defendant seems to have relatively clear family-social relationship.

The above is the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

As above, in full view of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, health status, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence, circumstances after the crime, and the scope of recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines set by the Sentencing Committee, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is within the appropriate scope and cannot be deemed as excessively heavy.

The defendant's defense counsel is highly likely to be subject to departure order if the judgment of the court below becomes final and conclusive.