The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

Seized evidence, articles 5, 11 through 13, 16, 17, 19, 22.

The summary of the grounds for appeal: The punishment imposed by the court below on the defendant (five years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

In the case of narcotics-related crimes, it is not easy to detect narcotics due to their characteristics, the risk of recidivism is high, as well as the negative impact on the society as a whole, and in particular, the import of narcotics is highly likely to cause the spread of narcotics and additional crimes resulting therefrom.

The amount of marijuana imported by the defendant is more than 1.2kg, and it cannot be assessed that the responsibility for the crime is less than that of the defendant.

In around 2013, the Defendant committed the instant crime of the same kind again even though he had the record of being sentenced to the suspension of indictment and the criminal punishment of a fine by smoking and receiving marijuana, etc. on several occasions.

These points are disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant does not seem to have led to, or directed the execution of, the marijuana import crime.

The Defendant recognized the instant crime and committed a mistake.

All marijuana imported by the defendant was confiscated and not distributed in the market.

The Defendant provided cooperation in the investigation by providing other criminal offenders related to narcotics with personal information.

These points are favorable to the defendant.

In addition, when comprehensively taking into account the Defendant’s age, occupation, character and conduct, environment, means and consequence of the crime, motive and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., various sentencing conditions and sentences, sentencing criteria of the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee, etc., the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is justified.

In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is reasonable, and the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is decided again as follows.

【Grounds for the Judgment of the Supreme Court 】 Summary of facts constituting a crime and evidence recognized by the court is the same as that of each corresponding column of the judgment below.