The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

400,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (six months of imprisonment) of the lower court is too hot or (six months of imprisonment) it is too hot.

2. We examine both the judgment and the prosecutor’s respective unfair claims for sentencing.

The Defendant made a confession of all of the crimes of this case and the prevention of recurrence.

The defendant is leading to marriage with his wife in de facto marriage, and his family members want to leave his wife against the defendant.

On September 2017, the Defendant appears to have committed each of the crimes of this case because he was contacted by D around September 2017 and was unable to take a cruel base, and the Defendant was only engaged in purchase and medication and did not proceed to distribution, such as sale.

However, the handling of narcotics, including philophones, marijuana, etc., by itself, is highly likely to lead to another crime in a state where the nature of the crime is bad, smoking or medication, etc., and social harm and injury is very rough.

Although the defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 5 million by selling phiphonephones on 15 occasions, he/she repeatedly committed each of the crimes of this case even though he/she had been sentenced to a fine of KRW 5 million by selling phiphones on 15 occasions in 2015.

Above all, even though the appropriate sentence of this case is from October to August, 3 years, according to the sentencing criteria table of the Supreme Court, the original court seems to have rendered a sentence of substantial escape from the lower limit without any special reason that should be different from the same kind of case.

This is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition, in full view of all the sentencing conditions, including the defendant's age, family relation, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and method of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the sentence of the court below seems to be too uneasible and unfair.

Therefore, the defendant's argument is without merit and the prosecutor's argument is with merit.

3. If so, the prosecutor's appeal is reasonable, and thus, Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act is applicable.