2. The conclusion that most victims agreed to the judgment and agreed to pay 3,000 won to the victim P in the trial, and that the total theft amount is not significant, and that it is against the defendant is favorable to the defendant.

However, the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime, who was arrested as a larceny on June 16, 2019 and was released again, and again committed each larceny crime on July 31, 2019, and other various sentencing conditions in the instant pleadings, such as the Act on the Number of Crimes and the frequency of crimes, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment several times for the same crime; (b) the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime; and (c) the Defendant committed the instant larceny crime on July 31, 2019; and (d) the Defendant

3. As such, the appeal by the defendant is dismissed on the ground that the appeal by the defendant is without merit. However, since it is obvious that the omission of "proviso of Article 42 of the Criminal Act" in the application of the concurrent law is a clerical error, it is corrected to add it ex officio in accordance with Article 25(1)