2. The circumstances are favorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant made a confession of a part of the crime that was partially denied, the fact that the Defendant appears to repent of his mistake, the amount of damage is not so significant, the Defendant is aged 73 years old, the health status is not good.

However, the statutory punishment for habitual larceny under Article 5-4(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes is an imprisonment with prison labor for life or for not less than three years, and the court below seems to have sentenced to the maximum of the statutory punishment by considering fully favorable circumstances favorable to the defendant, and there is no special change in circumstances that may vary between the court below and the punishment. In the first instance court, the defendant has committed the crime of this case 13 times (9 times of imprisonment with prison labor, 3 times of suspended execution, 1 time of fine) or more, and in particular, he again committed the crime of this case during the period of repeated crime, a large number of criminal records in the same kind are crimes of several laws similar to this case, which are not agreed with or recovered from the victim until the court below, and it is difficult to deem that the court below has mitigated the punishment any other factors that may become the conditions for sentencing, such as the defendant's age and character, motive, means and method of the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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