2. Determination is more advantageous to the following: (a) the Defendant recognized all of the instant offenses; (b) the remainder, excluding cash and gold earing, out of the damaged articles, was returned to the victim D; and (c) the Defendant appears to be a disabled person of class 4 with a speech disorder to be not suitable for economic circumstances.

However, on September 6, 2017, the Defendant had been sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the same kind of crime, in particular, on or after the completion of the execution of the sentence on May 31, 2018, and without being aware of the fact that each of the instant crimes was committed during the period of repeated crime, and on or after the completion of the execution of the sentence, the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of the fact that he did not receive a letter from the damaged, and all other circumstances that form the conditions for the sentencing of this case as shown in the records, including the Defendant’s age, sex, sex, environment, health conditions, circumstances after the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., are considered to be appropriate, and thus, the Defendant’s argument that the punishment of this case is unfair 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 grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.