The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and two months of imprisonment) on the gist of the grounds of appeal is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.). The Defendant has four times the history of punishment for narcotics-related crimes (three times of imprisonment and one time of suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor), and it is inevitable to punish the Defendant as a serious repeated crime of the same kind.

Although the defendant provided further information about narcotics offenders after the sentence of the court below was rendered, it is difficult to change the circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below.

In addition, when comprehensively considering the sentencing conditions, such as the defendant's age, sexual conduct, environment, motive for the crime, and circumstances after the crime, and the scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines as shown in the hearing of the court below and the party deliberation, the sentence imposed by the court below is not hot since it takes place within the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.