2. The judgment that the Defendant recognized all of the instant offenses and against the Defendant, most of the theft goods were seized and returned to the victim, and the F and I did not want to be punished against the Defendant, and the fact that C is seeking a preference against the Defendant by agreement with the thief victim C, which came to the first instance trial, is favorable to the Defendant.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the majority of the victims are victims; (b) the victims of theft and fraud have not been recovered from damage to L; (c) six times of larceny criminal records; (d) three times of larceny criminal records are criminal records; and (e) the crime of this case has been repeatedly committed during the period of repeated crime due to the same kind of crime; and (e) the Defendant’s age, sex, criminal conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime; and (e) other circumstances, which are conditions for sentencing as shown in the trial process, such as the circumstances after the crime, are too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion

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.