2. The lower court rendered a sentence against the Defendant, taking into account the Defendant’s age and family relation, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., such as the method and frequency of the larceny of the habitual night structure of this case, the fact that the commission of the crime was committed again even after the commission of the crime, the fact that there was a previous criminal record of the same kind of punishment, the Defendant committed the crime while it was difficult for him to pay a large amount of debt, the Defendant committed the crime in depth, and other favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the Defendant deposited 6 million won for the recovery of damage.

The Defendant, on the ground that the Defendant had a child to support, etc., and the lower court’s punishment is heavy.

However, this seems to have already been reflected in the sentencing of the lower court.

When comprehensively considering the conditions of sentencing in the trial and the statutory penalty in the trial, the judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable bounds of its discretion.

There is no circumstance that it is deemed unfair to maintain the judgment of the court below as it is or that the judgment of the court below is unfair.

Therefore, each of the defendant and the prosecutor's argument of sentencing is not accepted.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.