The punishment of the court below (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, should respect the sentencing determination in cases where there exists a unique area of the first instance court, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Defendant recognized the instant crime.

In determining punishment for the crime of this case, the equity between night-time and larceny as stated in the facts constituting the crime of this case which became final and conclusive shall be considered in the judgment of the court below.

However, the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime.

Habitual larceny of this case is highly likely to be committed during the period of crime.

As a result, a number of victims have occurred and the degree of damage is high.

Nevertheless, most damages have not been recovered.

In addition, the defendant had a philophone.

There is no change in the circumstances that may change the punishment of the court below in the trial.

In addition, comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances, such as the character, conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime committed by the defendant as shown in the arguments of the court below and the party hearing, the sentence of the court below cannot be deemed to be unfair because it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. Therefore, 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