The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (an additional collection of KRW 5 million, KRW 160,000, KRW 160,000) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. On May 22, 2015, the crime of this case, which was committed on board, was delivered by the Defendant without compensation on one page, and the nature of the crime is not less than that of the Defendant, but it is also true that the Defendant requires strict punishment against the Defendant in that he committed the crime of this case, even though he was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a narcotics crime at the Seoul Central District Court on May 22, 2015.

However, the defendant recognized the crime of this case and divided his mistake, and the defendant immediately left away after he received a penphone from D.

In fact, the defendant administered the philophone or provided it to a third party.

In light of the fact that there is no evidence to see, and even according to the notice of the status of observation bound in the record, it is confirmed that both voice reactions have occurred in the drug reaction test conducted during the period of protection observation against the defendant, and other various circumstances that are the conditions of sentencing as shown in the record, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the court below does not seem to be unfair because it is too uneasible.

3. According to the conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.