2. The judgment can be taken into account the following: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of the body of crime; and (b) some victims (No. 26 at the time of original trial) have temporarily returned stolen articles seized; (c) while the Defendant, at the night, destroyed a crime prevention window and stolen cash by intrusion on another’s business store; (d) was responsible for 26 times or less in total; (e) the victims’ request for punishment is not recovered; and (e) there was a request for punishment due to the victims’ damage; and (e) other various sentencing conditions indicated in the arguments, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and family environment, are deemed unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is not 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.