2. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant are that the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime due to the lack of economic circumstances at the time, and that his mistake is repented and reflected, etc.

However, there are many kinds of records that the Defendant was punished by imprisonment with prison labor, etc. for the same crime. The crime of this case was committed by the Defendant prepared for the commission of the crime, intruded into the structure managed by the victims, and stolen the victims' property several times in a short period, and presented the resident registration certificate to the police officer in charge with the intent to escape from criminal punishment by being investigated by the police due to the above theft suspicion, and presented the victim's name registration certificate as if the Defendant was the punishment of the Defendant. The crime of this case was committed in the course of the investigation of this case, with the intention to escape from criminal punishment, and the nature of the crime is very poor, such as escape from the investigation of this case, and the damage was not sufficiently recovered until recently. In full view of all the sentencing conditions such as the Defendant's age, environment, character, etc., it is difficult to view the sentencing of the

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.

However, it is obvious that "the thief of Article 329 of the Criminal Procedure Act" among the "the pertinent provision on the 1...... criminal facts" applied in the judgment of the court below is a misunderstanding of a clerical error, and thus, it is deleted pursuant to Article 25 (1) of the Regulations

.