All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

A. The sentence of imprisonment with prison labor (four years of imprisonment, confiscation) of the first instance court is too unreasonable.

(b)the sentence of the first instance court for the inspection is too uneasible and unreasonable;

2. In the instant crime, the Defendant committed the instant crime using the gaps of construction materials, such as the sn beam beamline, etc. stored at the construction site, and was stolen by a method deviating from the water surface to the water surface, and the commission of the instant crime is not good in light of the method of crime, etc.

On February 9, 2010, the Defendant committed the instant crime with the same criminal records, such as imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, on the grounds of a theft of wire materials, etc., and committed the instant crime with the same criminal records again during the period of repeated crimes, on the one hand, remaining after the release and remaining after the release.

Damage recovery has not been properly performed except that the damaged product is high, and the attempted product has not been restored or temporarily restored.

The sentence of imprisonment on the accused is inevitable.

On the other hand, when comprehensively considering all the reasons for punishment on the defendant as stated in the records of the instant case, including the fact that the defendant's mistake is against himself/herself, and some of the crimes are committed simultaneously, the scope of punishment to which the first instance court reduced the amount of punishment (three to twenty years of imprisonment) and then the scope of punishment to which the first instance court sentenced the amount of punishment according to the sentencing guidelines falls under the basic area of category 1 (general repeated thief) among "Habitual thief" among "Habitual thief" in the sentencing guidelines for the crime of larceny according to the sentencing guidelines, and the scope of punishment to which the amount of punishment to which the above recommendation is imposed falls under two to four years, or Article 5-4 (6) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes. Thus, the scope of punishment to which the upper limit and the lower limit of the above recommendation are aggravated by

The sentencing of a four-year imprisonment near the lower limit is deemed appropriate, and it is not deemed that it is too hot or unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant and the prosecutor's assertion.