2. The court below determined the above punishment against the defendant on the grounds as stated in its reasoning. The defendant shows an attitude against each of the crimes in this case, and agreed with all victims, as well as that the defendant must take into account the equality with the case where the crime in each of the special larceny crimes in this case should be judged simultaneously with the crime recorded in the column of the criminal records of the court below. The circumstances alleged in favorable sentencing in the court below are deemed to have been sufficiently taken into account while determining the punishment in the court below. In addition, even if the defendant had been punished several times due to larceny, even if he/she had been punished several times by the crime of larceny, the circumstances alleged in favorable sentencing in the court below are deemed to have been sufficiently taken into account, such as the defendant's age, sex, criminal conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime in this case, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the judgment of the court below is too excessive to excess the reasonable scope of discretion.

shall not be appointed by a person.

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.