The appeal is dismissed.

2. The circumstances are that the Defendant’s mistake is divided in depth and reflected, five theft victims agreed with each other, most of the victims did not want punishment against the Defendant, and part of the damage was recovered.

However, there are records of punishment for larceny committed several times, and the fact that each of the crimes of this case was committed without being aware of during the period of repeated crime, and even if damage was not caused by the fire burning crime, damage is not restored. The crime of this case according to the sentencing guidelines established by the Sentencing Commission, which is set up by the Sentencing Commission: the thief group, the thief group, the thief group, the thief group, the special sentencing factors (general larceny), the stief group, the thief group, the thief group, the thief group, the thief group, the thief group (general larceny), the thief group for general property (general larceny), the thief for special sentencing factors (general larceny), the thief group, the thief group, the 2 (general larceny), the stief group for general property (special sentencing), the stief group, the stief group and the stief group (special sentencing).

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.