2. In full view of the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, the Defendant’s confession of the instant crime, and the frequency of the commission of the instant crime, etc., in light of the following: (a) there is no good quality of the relevant crime; (b) the Defendant has been punished several times of larceny; and (c) other factors such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime; and (d) other factors that the lower court is deemed to have exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion in sentencing determination; and (b) there is no new material that the lower court is found to have exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion in sentencing determination (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

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

However, pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the summary of the evidence as stated in the judgment of the court below is to be revised by adding "each entry in the statement of H and Q as of 1.H and Q as of 3rd page 19 and 20."

.