Judgment

The crime of this case was committed by the defendant on August 24, 2015 due to the same crime, and was committed habitually after the execution of the sentence was completed on August 24, 2015, and thus, it is not good that the crime was committed, and there was no agreement with the most victims, and the fact that the defendant was subject to nine times of the same crime or the juvenile protection case was committed against the defendant.

However, there are circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant is recognized as committing the crime of this case, that some victims (J) will take the defendant's preference (the trial record No. 43 pages), that some thefts have been seized, and that they have been returned to the victims.

In addition, considering the fact that there is no special change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below after the sentence of the court below, and the various circumstances that are the conditions for the sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, environment, sex conduct, motive of the crime, and circumstances before and after the crime, since the sentence of the court below cannot be deemed to be unfair since the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable

In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since there is no ground for appeal by the defendant. It is so decided as per Disposition.