2. In light of the judgment, the fact that the defendant led to the confession of the crime, the amount of theft and the amount of defraudation is relatively small, the fact that the victim of larceny agreed with the victim of larceny is a favorable reason for sentencing. Despite the fact that the criminal records of larceny and fraudulent crimes have been committed again during the period of repeated crime even though they had been four times, the fact that the defendant did not agree with the victims of the crime is an unfavorable reason for sentencing.

In full view of the above factors, the lower court’s punishment is deemed reasonable, since it is determined that the sentence of the lower court is reasonable, considering the following factors: the Defendant’s age, family relation, economic situation, the background and motive leading to the commission of the crime, and all other matters pertaining to the sentencing specified in the records and arguments in this case. Therefore, the Defendant’

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.