The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The reasoning of the appeal is that the sentence of the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s judgment, and where the sentencing of the lower court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined the sentence against the Defendant by comprehensively taking account of the circumstances favorable to the Defendant and unfavorable conditions

The circumstances alleged by the defendant on the grounds of appeal (a confession, etc.) seems to have already been considered in the sentencing process of the original court.

In addition, there is no new change in circumstances that can change the sentence of the court below in the first instance court.

When comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances, such as character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime committed by the Defendant during the deliberation of the original court and the party concerned, the lower court’s punishment is too excessive to exceed the reasonable scope of discretion and thus is unreasonable. In so doing, it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s punishment is too unfair as it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, and is thus unreasonable. In so doing, the lower court did not err by exceeding the reasonable scope of discretion, or by exceeding the reasonable scope of discretion, or by exceeding the bounds of the benefits arising from lending an access medium (including marijuana).

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.