The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-finding or misunderstanding of the legal principles [the part concerning the crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc.] Notwithstanding the fact that the defendant administered a psychotropic drug in the same manner as indicated in the facts charged at the time and place indicated in paragraph (1) of the facts charged (the part concerning the crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (i.e., the part concerning the crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc.)], the court below concluded that the defendant administered a camopon (the part concerning a single camopon; hereinafter referred to as the “camopon”) under the circumstances as indicated in the judgment of the court below, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts or misapprehending the legal principles.

B. The sentence of imprisonment (one year and six months) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant administered a penphone in the time and place specified in paragraph (1) of the court below's decision, as stated in the reasoning of the court below, and there is no evidence to suspect that the defendant was subjected to a "brochiscon" by F due to the circumstance as alleged by the defendant. Thus, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

I would like to say.

B. We examine the argument of unfair sentencing, despite the fact that the Defendant had already been punished several times for violating the Psychotropic Drugs Control Act and the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc., the same kind of punishment.