The defendants' appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of sentence of the first instance court on Defendant A (one year of imprisonment and additional collection) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence of the first instance court (one hundred months of imprisonment and additional collection) on Defendant B is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. The crime of this case as to Defendant A’s assertion is a crime of this case where the Defendant, who is the attitude of illegal stay in the Republic of Korea, assisted or traded the trade of YA, a narcotics, the body and mind of which is determined by Meptamins, and administered them. The crime of this case is highly likely to have a serious adverse effect on society as a whole, such as harming an individual’s body and mind, impairing the public health, and inducing other crimes, and the frequency of the crime is nine times more.

subsection (b) of this section.

However, the first instance court determined the range of applicable sentences (one month to 15 years imprisonment) by taking into account the following factors: (a) the Defendant made confessions of all of the crimes in this case and reflects the fact that the Defendant has no criminal records in the Republic of Korea; and (b) the Defendant has no criminal records in the Republic of Korea; and (c) taking into account various sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, criminal records, occupation, environment, etc.; and (d) the scope of recommended sentences

Items c) and c.

Since it falls under the basic area, the scope of the recommendation sentence is one to two years of imprisonment, and the scope of the final recommendation according to the standards for processing multiple crimes is one to three years of imprisonment.

In light of all the sentencing materials indicated in the records of this case, the sentence imposed by the first instance court to the defendant is determined to be the highest of the sentencing range and the sentencing range in the sentencing guidelines. Thus, the sentencing of the first instance court is too unreasonable because the sentencing of the first instance court is too inappropriate.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

B. Defendant B.