All of the appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants and Defendant A are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Each sentence (two years of imprisonment, one year of suspended sentence, one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) that the court below sentenced the Defendants to the Defendants is unreasonable.

B. Defendant A’s sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the addiction of narcotics and the harm caused by administration of narcotics in light of the judgment on the Defendants C and D, etc., the crime of narcotics need to be strictly punished and eradicated. In light of the fact that the said Defendants administered phiphonephones even after they voluntarily surrenders to the investigation agency, and that the degree of phiphone addiction in the hair from the hair of the said Defendants seems not to be somewhat weak. However, in light of the detection of phiphones ingredients in the crime of this case, the above Defendants reflects the above Defendants’ mistake in the confession of the crime of this case. Meanwhile, the above Defendants’ mistake in the confession of the crime of this case; Defendant C was first punished for the crime of this case; Defendant C was not subject to punishment or a fine exceeding the same kind of crime; there was no previous conviction for the crime of this case; considering the above Defendants’ age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime of this case, the circumstances after the crime of this case, the prosecutor’s assertion that the above Defendants’ punishment of the above Defendants cannot be justified.

B. In light of the judgment of Defendant A and the Defendant’s assertion together, and the addiction of narcotics and the harm caused by the medication of narcotics, etc., the crime of this case requires a strict punishment and eradication. The crime of this case purchased a philophone exceeding 100g and administered it with the buphones together with the buphones, and the quantity of the philophones handled is very large, and the crime of this case is likely to be criticized because it spreads philophones to the neighbors.