특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds of appeal is unreasonable. 2. Although the judgment of this court is divided in depth into the defendant's own crime, the defendant repeatedly committed the crime of habitual larceny of this case during the period of repeated crime of the same kind, the victims and not agreed so far, and other various circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the defendant's age, character, conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, frequency, method and result of the crime of this case, circumstances after the crime, risk of recidivism, etc. are considered comprehensively, the first instance court's sentencing range of recommended sentencing (the basic area of habitual larceny, the basic area of habitual larceny, the two-year imprisonment, and the two-year imprisonment) cannot be considered to be too unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's argument disputing this point cannot be accepted.
3. According to the conclusion, Defendant’s appeal is not accepted under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act (However, pursuant to Article 25 of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure, Article 25 of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure, Article 364(4) of the relevant Act regarding the facts of the crime shall be corrected to “the pertinent Act regarding the facts of the crime and the choice of punishment (the choice of imprisonment with prison labor),” and Article 342 of the same Act shall be deleted.