The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment and one year and eight months) imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. It is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions compared to the judgment of the first instance court, if there is no change in the sentencing conditions, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court, based on the foregoing legal doctrine, determined the sentence by comprehensively taking account of the various circumstances as stated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Since then, there is no new circumstance that can change the sentence of the court below in the trial court.

The crime of this case may be a major risk to the public health, and the defendant committed the crime again even though he was well aware of the hazard and side effects caused by the abuse of the ice system, which led to the repeated crime, and the accomplice appears to have an attitude to assume a major responsibility to the co-offenders. In addition, considering all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the argument of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive and means of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentencing of the court below is too unreasonable and it does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

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