2. It is recognized that the Defendant, who made a confession of all the crimes, has divided his mistake, and the punishment should be imposed in consideration of equity between special larceny for which the judgment became final and the crimes of this case are concurrently adjudicated.

However, in light of the form, method, frequency, etc. of each of the crimes of this case, the nature of the crime is very bad, the defendant has a record of juvenile protective disposition, fine, punishment, and punishment for the same kind of crime over several times, and the damage caused by fraud was not completely recovered, and the victim did not agree with the victim, and there is no change of circumstance that may otherwise determine the court below and the punishment. In addition, considering the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of each of the crimes of this case, the motive, method and consequence of each of the crimes of this case, and the range of recommended sentencing guidelines established by the Sentencing Committee of the Supreme Court, the sentence of the court below 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 as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

(However, it is apparent that the “joint” of the 3th two parallels, 14, 4th parallels, 18th parallels, 5th parallels, and 15th parallels is a clerical error in each public offering, and thus, it is corrected ex officio in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure.