A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

2. The instant crime was committed by the Defendant, by means of opening a window with no low locked window and intrusion upon residence, and thus, the victims’ property was stolen or attempted, and the crime was considerably poor in light of the method and content of the crime.

The number of victims reaches ten and the amount of damage is heavy and the responsibility for the crime is heavy.

The defendant has been sentenced to two times as well as one time as a suspended sentence due to the same crime.

Considering these circumstances, the sentence to the defendant should be imposed.

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant led to the instant crime; (b) the Defendant made a confession of the instant crime; (c) some of the damaged items are seized and provisionally returned; and (d) the victim does not want to be punished from the investigation stage; and (c) seven victims who agreed with the Defendant do not want to be punished by the Defendant; (d) the Defendant did not commit the larceny crime for a relatively long period from 2009 to 2009; and (e) equity in sentencing and sentencing with the same and similar sentencing cases favorable to the Defendant; and (e) equity in sentencing factors, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the instant crime; and (e) circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is justified.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

[Reasons for the Judgment] Summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court is stated in the corresponding column of the judgment below.