2. The judgment of the court below shows the attitude that the defendant recognized all of the crimes and reflected against the defendant, and agreed with the victim H (related to special larceny and fraud by using computers, etc.) and J (related to intrusion into residence and theft) in the court below, and reached an agreement with W, Q, and S (related to fraud of Internet product price) in the court below, there are favorable circumstances for the defendant.

In full view of the following circumstances: (a) there was a history of having been suspended due to a large number of juvenile protective disposition records, theft, computer, etc. committed by the Defendant due to the theft of mobile phones in the soup room, and (b) the execution of punishment was completed due to habitual larceny and computer-use fraud; and (c) the crime of fraud, such as special larceny and computer, of this case under the same several Acts during the period of repeated crime; and (d) repeated commission of the crime of fraud against many unspecified victims; (b) considerable damage has not yet been recovered; and (c) other circumstances that are disadvantageous to the Defendant, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., which are the conditions for sentencing as shown in the arguments, even if considering favorable circumstances for the Defendant, it cannot be deemed unfair because the sentence of the lower court is excessively 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 on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.