6 the offence as serious and the interests of society as requiring a severe sentence. However, he does not appear to have given sufficient regard to the third leg of the accepted triad relevant to the determination of what is appropriate. In the light of the mitigating factors set out in the other judgment, of which the most important is that appellant had an unblemished record, the sentence imposed was unduly severe despite the fact that appellant displayed no remorse. In my view the court's disapproval of appellant's conduct may be sufficiently voiced by combining effective incarceration in terms of sec 276(l)(i) of the Criminal Procedure Act with suspended imprisonment. At the same time such an order would put the appellant's future in his own hands in greater measure than the magistrate did. The appeal is allowed. The sentence imposed by the magistrate is set aside and replaced with the following: "1. Beskuldigde word gevonnis tot 3 jaar gevangenisstraf ingevolge a 276(l)(i) van Wet 51 van 1977. 2. Daarbenewens word beskuldigde gevonnis tot 2 jaar 7 gevangenisstraf opgeskort vir 5 jaar op voorwaarde dat hy nie