The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the first crime in the original judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months, and the second crime in the original judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and 4 months, and additional collection of 100,000 won) declared by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. The crime of this case is a normal situation favorable to the defendant in which the defendant inflicts bodily injury on the victim E on or around August 22, 2010, and administered Mepta, a psychotropic drug, on or around May 9, 2014, the defendant recognized all the crime of this case in the trial and reflects the mistake, the victim E does not want punishment against the defendant, and the crime of bodily injury is concurrent crimes with the crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (fence) and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, which became final and conclusive on May 31, 2012, and it is necessary to determine punishment for the crime of this case in consideration of equity in cases where judgment is to be made simultaneously in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act.

However, the Defendant has had the record of being punished several times as a crime of violence and the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., and committed each of the crimes of this case during the repeated crime due to the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., and there is a need to strictly punish the crimes related to narcotics as a serious crime with severe social harm and danger of recidivism. As a result of the application of the sentencing guidelines by the Sentencing Commission of the Supreme Court [the scope of recommended punishment for the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc.: from 1 year to 3 years, considering the period between 1 year to 3 years as a special person, the previous case (aggravated reason) as a special person] and other various circumstances that are the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, background, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the

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