2. Circumstances that may be considered in light of the circumstances are given to the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant recognized the error and divided, the result of the instant crime is relatively insignificant and part of the damaged goods have been recovered, the Defendant’s age (58 years old) and health is not good due to high blood pressure, etc.

However, even if the defendant committed the crime of this case again within two months after the execution of punishment was completed due to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, the defendant committed the crime of this case again from around 201 to around 2010, such as larceny of the defendant, the probation one time from around 201 to around 2010, and the sentence six times, etc., continuously committed the crime of larceny. The crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, which was sentenced to three years as the defendant's final criminal conviction, was also a theft of goods by intrusion upon the dwelling where the entrance, etc. was not corrected, and was the same law, and the defendant did not take any measures for recovery from damage to the crime of this case. In full view of all the sentencing conditions such as the defendant's age, family relation, criminal record, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, the means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc.,

3. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is groundless.