The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Reasons for appeal

A. In relation to the fact-finding special injury, there is no fact that the Defendant was the victim of the stroke lease.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment with prison labor for 8 months, 2 years of suspended sentence, 2 years of suspended sentence as indicated in the lower judgment) is too unreasonable.

The Defendant argued to the same effect as the grounds for appeal even in the lower court’s judgment on the assertion of factual mistake.

In full view of the circumstances admitted by each evidence of the court below as stated in the judgment below, the court below held that the defendant could sufficiently recognize the fact that he was the victim because he was out of the Switzerland lease, such as the witness's statement.

The decision was determined.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in comparison with the court records, since the witness's statement has credibility for the reasons as stated in the court below's judgment, the judgment of the court below is just, and it is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts as alleged in the grounds of appeal by the defendant or defense counsel, which affected the

subsection (b) of this section.

In the case of a crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. for the Determination of Illegal Sentencing, the crime of narcotics, etc. is highly harmful to the people's health and society as well as to the general public's health and society due to their high toxicity and the possibility of additional crimes, etc., and it is not easy to detect such crime in light of its characteristics, and the risk of recidivism is high, so it is necessary to strictly punish and eradicate the relevant

However, the defendant is able to repent his mistake.

The number of drugs with a psychotropic spirit was limited to one time.

There are no criminal records of the same kind.

It is necessary to consider the equity in the case of judgment with the previous conviction of final judgment rendered in the original judgment.

In case of special injury, the defendant does not want the punishment of the defendant by mutual agreement with the victim.

However, the defendant is in danger of drinking and exposing the face of a drunk victim.