Judgment

A. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant are recognized, such as the confession of the instant crime by Defendant A, and the fact that part of the damaged goods was returned to the victims to a certain extent that the damage was restored, etc.

However, the crime of this case was committed by the Defendant in collusion with B, which stolen clothes worth KRW 5,588,00 in total at the market price of the samples underground of the department store, in light of the circumstances of the crime, method of the crime, theft value, etc., the criminal liability is very heavy; the Defendant did not make any effort to recover victims' damage; the Defendant committed the crime of this case at several times during the period of repeated crimes; the Defendant committed the crime of this case at several times during the period of repeated crimes; in our criminal litigation law taking the trial-oriented principle and direct principle, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing in comparison with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first trial does not go beyond the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015); and the court below’s aforementioned circumstances do not seem to fall under the circumstances of change in circumstances, such as the change in circumstances in the circumstances of the Defendant’s age after the sentence of the court below was pronounced in favor of the Defendant.

B. Defendant B was led to Defendant B’s confession of the instant crime and reflects his depth on the mistake, and some of the damaged goods were returned to the victims.