2. Each of the larcenys of this case in question is a stolen crime involving a brush by a person in a large Schlage, such as the brupt in Sungnam-si, with a view to spreading one eye, and it is difficult to view that each of the thefts of this case itself is a very serious crime.

In addition, the defendant, around 1986, has been unable to live economically after being divorced from her husband, and in February 2013, it seems that the health of the defendant is not very good.

In light of the Defendant’s depth in committing the instant crime, the Defendant was able to take the Defendant’s action in the instant court so that the Defendant may live together with the remaining living together, and a new family, by taking into account his difficult circumstances.

However, the Defendant was punished nine times or more for the same kind of crime, and the sum of the sentence imposed among them was ten years and six months, and three years have not passed since the imprisonment was sentenced and was released from the prison.

In addition, the crime of this case committed by a defendant was sentenced to imprisonment twice or more for the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and again committed the same crime within three years after the execution of the sentence, and the lower limit of the statutory penalty under Article 5-4(6) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes,

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not recover from the victims until the court of first instance until the victims suffered damage.

In addition, considering the character, conduct, environment, circumstances and result of the crime committed by the defendant, all of the sentencing conditions in the case, such as the circumstances after the crime, the sentence imposed by the court below is appropriate, and it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the defendant is too inappropriate.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed on the ground that it is without merit.