2. The judgment of the defendant does not repeat the crime because he reflects the error of the crime in depth, and the two cell phoness and two white bars were returned to the victim B among the stolen damage items, and the defendant's vehicle is covered by a comprehensive insurance policy.

However, the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes even though he/she had been sentenced to two times of suspended execution due to special larceny and larceny, and has been punished three times of a fine due to drinking driving, and again committed each of the instant crimes.

Without correction, 1,449,00 won in cash was stolen from the victim B's vehicle parked without correction, and 1,449,000 won in the city was used repeatedly through two times.

On July 9, 2012, in the case of driving under influence without a license, the blood alcohol level was 0.132% high, and the crime quality is not somewhat high in that the victim E and G caused a traffic accident to inflict bodily injury.

Until the trial, they did not agree with the victims.

In addition, considering the age, character and conduct, environment, etc. of the defendant and all the sentencing conditions shown in the pleadings, the sentence imposed by the court below cannot be deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.