2. It is recognized that the judgment of the defendant is against the confession of the crime, the number of smartphones, which are stolen by the defendant, is less than the number of smartphones, and the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Larceny) and each of the crimes of this case, which became final and conclusive on October 21, 2013, are in a concurrent crime relationship under Article 37 of the Criminal

However, the crime of this case is committed in a systematic and planned manner by the defendant to take part in the defendant's act of purchasing smartphones lost from his accomplices. It is necessary to eradicate the crime because it is not good to encourage the crime that is stolen or lost in the Republic of Korea, and it is necessary to eradicate the crime. The defendant committed the crime of this case without being aware of even though he was the probation period due to larceny, and the defendant has the record of receiving criminal punishment and juvenile protective disposition due to the crime of this case. In full view of all the sentencing factors in the arguments of this case including the defendant's age, character and conduct, circumstances of the crime of this case, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the court below's punishment is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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.