2. The judgment of the court below is that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflects his mistake, the frequency of the crime is limited to twice, one of which is favorable to the defendant, and the amount of damage suffered by the victim is a small amount. However, the defendant has a history of having been punished by imprisonment for the same crime eight times between around 1992 and around 2010, and the defendant was released from prison life for three years due to habitual larceny under the same law even though he was released from prison life for three years, it cannot be said that the defendant again committed the crime of this case during the period of repeated crime even after 6 months have not been abandoned, and the defendant did not take any measures to recover the damage suffered by the victim, and in full view of the records and arguments of this case, such as the age, character and conduct of the defendant, family relationship, etc., the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

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