The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The punishment sentenced by the court below in summary of the grounds for appeal (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the original judgment in the appellate court, and the sentencing of the original court is not beyond the scope of reasonable discretion, it is reasonable to respect

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). As to the instant case, there is no significant change in the sentencing conditions compared to the lower court in the appellate trial.

The fact that the defendant has no record of criminal punishment in Korea, that all of the crimes are recognized, and that the defendant has an attitude to repent of mistake, and that the defendant has a child who has to support his/her mother country, etc. should be considered as favorable to the defendant.

However, the crime of this case, when the defendant entered the Republic of Korea as a tourist visa and was employed as a marina branch, imported a large number of 20 grams in Thailand with his accomplice C, and then administered, purchased, and possessed phiphones on several occasions. Furthermore, the crime of this case is not good in light of the type and quantity of psychotropic drugs handled by the defendant as well as the contents and methods of the crime.

Although the defendant was not punished in Korea, he was sentenced to the same crime related to narcotics in Thailand.

In full view of such circumstances as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., even if considering the favorable circumstances of the Defendant, the sentence imposed by the lower court is unreasonable because it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

Defendant

We do not accept the argument.

The defendant's appeal is dismissed on the ground that it is without merit.