The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment requires strict punishment and eradication in light of the facts that the Defendant led to the confession of the crime of this case while committing the crime of this case, the number of phones used by the Defendant as the crime of this case does not exceed 3g, and actively cooperate in the investigation of narcotics, such as making statements to the drug supplier (one top line) at the time of investigation agency. However, the crime of this case is not only twice after the Defendant purchased phiphones with other narcotics and provided three times for other narcotics offenders, but also the harm caused by the addiction of narcotics and the medication of narcotics. In particular, the crime of the provision of narcotics in this case requires strict punishment and more severe punishment by spreading and distributing narcotics in such a way that others are placed in the addiction of narcotics. In light of the fact that the number of phones used as the phone used by the Defendant for the crime of this case exceeds 1g, and the result of the Madmon test was found to have been sentenced to criminal punishment for the same kind of crime of this case during the sentencing period of this case (3.5 cm to the previous section of this case).

Title, provision and sale), basic crimes and recommendations for concurrent crimes (basic areas, aggravated factors - previous and previous crimes within three years - mitigation factors - important investigation cooperation): Imprisonment with prison labor for a period of one year to two years, and the range of final recommendations following the aggravation of multiple crimes: imprisonment for a period of one year to three years: the term of imprisonment for a period of one year to three years); the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment; and the instant case.