2. The circumstances favorable to the above defendant are as follows: (a) the defendant led to the confession and reflect of each of the crimes in this case; (b) some of the stolen victims were recovered; (c) the defendant agreed with some victims; and (d) the defendant did not have any record of punishment for the same crime

However, each of the crimes of this case is committed by the Defendant habitually and attempts to steals or steals another’s property. The period of the crime reaches about six months, the circumstances favorable to the Defendant had already been considered in the original judgment, and there was no special change in circumstances or circumstances that could be newly considered in sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment.

In full view of the above favorable circumstances and conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstances after the commission of the crime, and other various circumstances, which are conditions for sentencing as shown in the trial process, even if considering all favorable circumstances for the Defendant, it cannot be deemed unfair since the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable. Thus, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

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