2. The facts that the defendant is led to confession are favorable circumstances; however, the number of times of the crime of habitual larceny and attempted larceny in this case has many been punished twice, and the amount of damage has not yet been recovered or there has not been any agreement with the victims despite the fact that the defendant committed the crime in this case during the period of repeated crime, even though he had been punished twice as the same crime (i.e., attempted larceny and attempted larceny in this case); however, the amount of damage has not yet been compensated or has not yet been agreed with the victims; the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a number of years and six months after the crime in this case; the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a more than two years and six months; and the defendant was sentenced to a punishment for more than two years and four months after the retrial; and it is not determined that the court below’s punishment is excessively unreasonable.

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