The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Seized evidence 10 to 10.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant (two years of imprisonment, confiscation and collection 4.1 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment is based on the fact that the defendant was punished by the suspension of the execution of imprisonment and imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime as each of the crimes in this case, and the amount of phiphones handled by the defendant is not a large amount. The defendant himself is deemed to have been involved in the sale of phiphones without the administration of phiphones, and it seems that the defendant specialized in the sale of phiphones. However, even though the defendant was found to have mistakenly recognized the error, the defendant is suffering from chronic viroid non-virosis and liverrosis, and suffering from chronic virosis and liverrosis, etc., and the health condition is bad, and the defendant must support the mother who suffers from philost and Q, who is suffering from philostrosis, etc. at the investigation stage, by informing the defendant of the upper line and Q with the defendant who supplied phiphones at the investigation stage, and cooperate in the investigation of narcotics investigation by informing him of arrest of H and E, the circumstances and circumstances of the defendant's each of the crime in this case, and circumstances following circumstances.

3. The judgment below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act as the defendant's appeal is well-grounded, and the following decision is rendered after pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the evidence admitted by this court is as follows: (a) the court below’s order on the storage of 2. Handphones as “2. Handphones possession,” and (b) 7 of the same column as “the custody of Handphones” is deemed as “the custody of Handphones,” respectively, in addition to the facts charged by the court below.