2. The following facts are the circumstances favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects in depth the mistake; (b) the Defendant was arrested on the scene immediately after the instant crime and returned the damaged amount to the victim; and (c) the instant crime is in the concurrent relationship between larceny for which the judgment became final and conclusive and the group subsequent to Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and should take account of equity in

On the other hand, the crime of this case is an unfavorable circumstance to the defendant, where the defendant, who attempted to deposit KRW 1,90,000 in cash at the time of cash entrance, committed the crime of this case, and then committed the crime of this case against the defendant. The defendant had a record of criminal punishment twice for the same crime. In particular, on December 4, 2013, the Daejeon District Court sentenced the defendant to six months of imprisonment with prison labor for larceny and committed the crime of this case on March 4, 2014 only two months after the execution of the punishment was completed.

In full view of the above circumstances and other factors of sentencing, including the background of the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, and environment, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable as it is too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion 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.