All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. As to the summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing, each of the sentencing sentencing) by the lower court (one year and six months), the Defendant asserts that the Defendant is too unfasible, and that the prosecutor is too unfasible and unfair.

2. The crime of this case, even though the defendant is not a narcotics handler, is administered, possessed, smoked, and possessed marijuana by purchasing phiphonephones, and the defendant recognized all of the crime of this case and reflected the mistake, etc. in favor of the defendant.

On the other hand, even though there was the history of punishment twice as a drug crime, the Defendant committed the drug crime in this case, and the quality of the crime is not good, and the quantity of philophones that the Defendant purchased and possessed is considerable, and the drug crime brings about the degradation of individuals, homes, society, and human society as a whole, and requires strict punishment in that it is a social phenomenon beyond the individual criminal act and beyond it.

In full view of the above circumstances and other circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, motive, means, and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, it does not seem that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too heavy or unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 4182, Oct. 26, 2016; Supreme Court Decision 200Da4182, Oct. 25, 2016).