2. The fact that all of the judgment crimes are recognized and reflected in the judgment, and the fact that it is necessary to consider the balance between the first head of the crime committed in the judgment below and the attempt to larceny a structure intrusion at night, which is one of the concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, as stated in the judgment below, should be considered.

However, in full view of various circumstances, such as the fact that there was a history of criminal punishment several times for the same crime, the failure to reach an agreement with the victims, the fact that there is no special change of circumstances after the judgment of the court below was rendered, equity in sentencing with the same and similar cases, and the defendant’s age, sex, conduct, environment, family relationship, and circumstances after the crime, it is difficult to view that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable because it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, we do not accept the above argument of the defendant's above sentencing.

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.