The sentence of the court below (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

It seems that the crime of this case was committed for the purpose of preparing living expenses in an economically difficult situation, and some of the damaged goods were returned to the victims in favor of the defendant.

However, the crime of this case was committed by the defendant in collaboration with Co-Defendant A, who is his own form of punishment, theft of cash or precious metal on three occasions, and the nature of the crime and the circumstances of the crime are not very good in light of the method of the crime. The defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months on August 16, 2013 and sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months on the same criminal act on August 24, 2013, and the above judgment became final and conclusive, and the crime of this case was committed during the suspended sentence period. The court below's punishment was limited to the maximum punishment within the scope of the mitigated mitigation of special larceny, taking into account various circumstances, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the sentence of the court below is unfairly excessive.

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