2. The crime of this case is an unfavorable circumstance to the defendant, where the defendant habitually intrudes on his residence at night, steals money and valuables worth KRW 400,000,000 in total five times, and attempted larceny over three times, and the nature of the crime is not weak. The defendant had the record of criminal punishment several times, and the defendant committed the crime of this case repeatedly during the period of repeated crime, and the victim seems to have been suffering from considerable apprehension due to the crime of this case, and the victim was unable to agree with the victims or to receive the letter from the victims, etc. up to the appellate trial.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant fully recognized the crime of this case and reflected the mistake, the amount of damage to the crime is not much significant, and some of the crimes are committed in violation of the attempted crime, etc. are favorable to the defendant.

As above, considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and means of crime, as well as the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, as well as the motive and consequence thereof, it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable to the extent that it is deemed that the Defendant exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, considering the circumstances after committing the crime, the scope of the recommended punishment determined by the Supreme Court

Therefore, Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing cannot be accepted.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.