2. The fact that the Defendant recognized each of the instant crimes and reflected, and the amount of damage is relatively small is favorable to the Defendant.

However, on April 24, 2014, the Defendant again committed each of the instant crimes during the suspended execution period after being sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor for larceny at the Ulsan District Court sentenced to one year of the suspended execution on April 24, 2014, and the Defendant did not make a serious effort for the repayment of damage, and did not reach an agreement with the Defendant and the victims up to the trial. The Defendant did not recover damage, and there was no special circumstance or change that could be newly considered in sentencing after the lower judgment.

In full view of the above favorable circumstances and conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstances after the commission of the crime, and other various circumstances, which are conditions for sentencing as shown in the trial process, even if considering all favorable circumstances for the Defendant, it cannot be deemed unfair since the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable. Thus, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.