The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes and repented in depth the mistake.

In addition, the fact that the defendant has no past record of criminal punishment exceeding the suspended sentence until now should be considered favorable to the defendant.

However, the crime of this case, however, was administered by the Defendant, and arrested the Defendant at an investigative agency, and was re-Medicationed after being released for the request for an appraisal of maternity, etc., and the punishment of the unlawful act is not weak.

In addition, the administration of narcotics is not only to avoid the body and mind of an individual due to their cryptism, toxicity, and radio wave, but also to maintain social safety and to create related crimes, so it constitutes a crime of great social harm and injury.

Furthermore, the defendant had a previous conviction of a fine for the same kind of crime, and the favorable circumstances mentioned above seems to have already been fully reflected in the sentencing judgment of the court below, and the scope of the recommended punishment determined by the sentencing guidelines for the same narcotics crime as in this case [the scope of the recommended punishment determined by the sentencing guidelines for the same narcotics crime].

Items c) and c.

In full view of the basic area (10 to 2 years), the lower court’s sentencing is not deemed to be too unreasonable because it is too unreasonable.

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