Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment.

The punishment sentenced by the court below (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

The fact that the defendant committed larceny by intrusion upon several times in a short period of time is not good in the nature of the crime of this case, multiple victims, and criminal records of the same kind are considered to be disadvantageous to sentencing.

However, in light of the fact that the defendant recognized the crime and reflected against the defendant, that the defendant agreed with some victims for the remaining victims, the amount of damage was deposited, that there was no criminal record except the suspended sentence of imprisonment and the fine sentenced in around 2004, and that there was no criminal record other than the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the punishment sentenced by the court below is too unreasonable.

Thus, the defendant's appeal is reasonable, and the remaining part of the judgment of the court below excluding the rejection of the application for compensation order among the judgment of the court below pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act shall be reversed, and

[Discied Judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and thus, it is cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 319(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 319(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 329 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively, for the crime;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;