2. The lower court rendered the above sentence, taking into account the circumstances that the Defendant had been punished 11 times as a property crime, in particular, that the Defendant committed the instant crime during the repeated crime period due to the same kind of crime, and that the victims want to punish the Defendant as the damage was not recovered, and that the victims want to be punished, and that the Defendant was committed at the time of and divided into the crime, that is not good in health and economic capacity, and that the damage was relatively minor.

In full view of the fact that there is no change in circumstances to change the sentencing of the lower court, other than the flexible and unsound circumstances taken into account by the lower court, and all other conditions of sentencing, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, background leading to the commission of the offense, means and consequence, size of the offense, and circumstances after the commission of the offense, it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s judgment exceeding or maintaining the reasonable limit of discretion is unreasonable.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Therefore, the Defendant’s above assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.