2. We examine the judgment, and the fact that the defendant is in conflict with the confession of the crime, the crime of this case is in conflict with the special injury crime for which the judgment became final and conclusive, Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the fact that most of the damaged items can be returned to the victim is a favorable sentencing ground, and the fact that the defendant has been punished for larceny three times is an unfavorable sentencing ground.

In full view of all the above sentencing factors, the Defendant’s age, sex, career, family relation, economic situation, background and motive leading up to the commission of the crime, circumstances after the commission of the crime, and other matters on the sentencing indicated in the records and arguments on the change of the circumstances, the judgment below’s punishment is deemed appropriate, and the prosecutor’s assertion is without merit, since there is no change of circumstances to be considered in the trial.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.