2. The judgment that the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case, some larceny victims do not want the punishment of the defendant, and some of the larceny victims were temporarily returned, etc. are favorable circumstances.

However, the Defendant had the record of being punished twice due to the theft and unauthorized driving of the same criminal, and even if the Defendant committed a number of identical crimes on February 12, 2019, he/she was arrested on the date of emergency arrest on the same day before being detained on February 15, 2019, and was arrested on the same day on the same day on the same day on the same day on the same day, and again released on the same day on February 8, 2019, even though he/she was detained on the same day, he/she had been released on several occasions without any reflectivity during the short period of time that was released after the arrest, and thus, he/she committed the same thief and unlicensed driving without the consent of the victims.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, environment, etc., the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed as excessively excessive beyond the scope of reasonable discretion.

3. 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.