Problem: PolandBall is a young, clever Ball. He is interested in prime numbers. He has stated a following hypothesis: "There exists such a positive integer n that for each positive integer m number n·m + 1 is a prime number".

Unfortunately, PolandBall is not experienced yet and doesn't know that his hypothesis is incorrect. Could you prove it wrong? Write a program that finds a counterexample for any n.

Input

The only number in the input is n (1 ≤ n ≤ 1000) — number from the PolandBall's hypothesis. 

Output

Output such m that n·m + 1 is not a prime number. Your answer will be considered correct if you output any suitable m such that 1 ≤ m ≤ 103. It is guaranteed the the answer exists.

Examples

Input

3


Output

1

Input

4


Output

2

Note

A prime number (or a prime) is a natural number greater than 1 that has no positive divisors other than 1 and itself.

For the first sample testcase, 3·1 + 1 = 4. We can output 1.

In the second sample testcase, 4·1 + 1 = 5. We cannot output 1 because 5 is prime. However, m = 2 is okay since 4·2 + 1 = 9, which is not a prime number.

Solution (in PYTHON):

Solution:
rr=raw_input
rrI = lambda: int(rr())
rrM = lambda: map(int,rr().split())
debug=0
if debug:
    fi = open('t.txt','r')
    rr=lambda: fi.readline().replace('\n','')

N = rrI()
def primes(n):
    sieve = [True] * (n/2)
    for i in xrange(3,int(n**0.5)+1,2):
        if sieve[i/2]:
            sieve[i*i/2::i] = [False] * ((n-i*i-1)/(2*i)+1)
    return [2] + [2*i+1 for i in xrange(1,n/2) if sieve[i]]

plt = set(primes(10**4 + 1))
for m in xrange(1, 1001):
    if m*N + 1 not in plt:
        print m
        break