The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal in this case’s sentencing conditions, the lower court’s imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. It is recognized that the judgment defendant repents wrongs and does not repeat the crime.

However, in light of the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime without being exposed to a repeated crime during the period of repeated crime, and smelting hallucinogenic substances several times in a short period, the Defendant seems to have a habit of inhaleing hallucinogenic substances for a certain period, and there is a need to isolate the Defendant from hallucinogenic substances for a certain period, and the Defendant did not recover from damage caused by the larceny up to the trial, and there is no special circumstance or circumstance that may be newly considered in sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment, and there is no change in the circumstances that may be newly considered in sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

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

(4) However, the court below's judgment corrected the "the execution of the sentence was completed before the demonstration was conducted" of the 2nd criminal facts as "the execution of the sentence was completed on September 22, 2010," and the summary of the evidence [1] column of "the prosecutor's interrogation protocol against the defendant was added to 1. The prosecutor's office."