2. A favorable circumstance is recognized, such as the fact that the Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes and divided in depth, the amount of damage in this case is a relatively small amount, and the victim H did not want the punishment of the Defendant.

However, since the crime of this case was committed on six occasions habitually for about one month by the defendant, he/she committed a theft of cash, which is located in the escape room, etc., using his/her clothes in six-months, the nature and circumstances of the crime are not good. The defendant did not take any measures to recover damage of the victims excluding the victim H up to the trial before the trial. The defendant was sentenced to three years for the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc., on December 30, 2008, and was sentenced four times for the same crime (three times, one time, one time, one time of suspended execution) and two times. In particular, the defendant committed the crime of this case repeatedly within the period of the punishment of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc., of Specific Crimes (the thief) and the criminal facts of this case were committed repeatedly after the completion of the execution of the punishment of the crime of this case on November 13, 2011, the defendant's age and circumstances leading up to the suspended sentence.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is justified.