2. In light of the above legal principles, the Defendant’s confession of each of the crimes of this case and reflects his mistake, the Defendant appears to have caused each of the crimes of this case by contingency under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant’s growth in a difficult family environment, the economic situation is not good, and the Defendant appears to have been an opportunity to satisfy and satisfy, through confinement life exceeding five months, and the Defendant is living in good faith.

However, the instant case reported falsely to the 119 comprehensive situation room twice in the absence of the fact that D intended to commit suicide or attempted to commit an act of larceny, etc. on the seven occasions, and attempted to commit an act of larceny by intrusioning upon the victim D without permission, and the nature of the relevant crime is not very good, and the Defendant did not agree with the victim up to the trial. The Defendant had six criminal records of larceny, five times, and one time, five times, and one time, are criminal records of probation, and the Defendant was sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment with prison labor at the Daejeon District Court on September 14, 2012, and the Defendant repeatedly committed each of the instant offenses during the period of imprisonment with prison labor for violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc. (ththie) and one year and six months on January 20, 2014, and without being informed of the completion of the execution of the sentence, and considering the risk of recidivism, the Defendant’s circumstances and circumstances that are disadvantageous to the Defendant, and the sentencing guidelines are unreasonable.

3. Conclusion.