The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment and two million won of additional collection) is too unreasonable, which is the gist of the grounds for appeal.

2. In light of the fact that the Criminal Procedure Act of Korea adopts the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness in the determination of sentencing exists in the area unique to the first instance judgment, and the fact that the appellate court’s ex post facto in-depth character, etc., it is reasonable to respect the first instance judgment in a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance judgment, and the first instance judgment does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.). The Defendant actively cooperates in the investigation to recognize each of the instant crimes and to arrest the investigative agency, which is a book of the supply of philopon, so that the investigative agency may arrest the C, which is a book of the supply of philopon, and there is a situation where health conditions are not good.

However, each of the crimes of this case is that the defendant sells phiphonephones and arranges the sales once, and it is not good to commit the crime in light of the form and frequency of the crime.

This crime of narcotics needs to be strictly punished and eradicated in light of the addiction of narcotics and the social harm caused by medication of narcotics.

Furthermore, the defendant is subject to criminal punishment more than 10 times for the same crime, and there is a high possibility of criticism because each crime of this case has been committed during the period of repeated crime.

In consideration of the circumstances favorable to the Defendant as seen earlier, the lower court sentenced the lowest limit of the recommended sentencing guidelines (one year and six months to six years). There is no special circumstance or change of circumstances that may be newly considered in the sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment.

In addition, the court below's punishment is too unreasonable, considering all the sentencing circumstances shown in the records and theories of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex, family environment, background of the crime, motive of the crime and profit-making, and the circumstances after the crime.