2. It is recognized that the judgment is based on the following: (a) the Defendants are both aware of their respective crimes and are against themselves; (b) the Defendants are not likely to suffer damage from the Defendants’ crimes; and (c) the joint criminal acts among them did not cause damage to the attempted crimes.

However, even if Defendant A had the past record of punishment for the same crime three times or more (the two times of suspended sentence) but repeats the thief without any particular awareness, the nature of the crime and the circumstances of the crime are not good, Defendant B has the past record of having been punished several times due to the same crime, and even if Defendant B had the past record of having been punished several times due to the last punishment, it is impossible to avoid sentence due to the fact that the sentence of the thief was committed without being aware of it even during the repeated crime period due to the last punishment, and that it is impossible to avoid sentence. In full view of all the records such as the defendants’ age, character and conduct, circumstances of the crime in this case, and the circumstances before and after the crime, even if the defendants consider the circumstances cited in the grounds of appeal, it is difficult for the court below to accept all the above arguments of the defendants.

3. As such, the Defendants’ appeal is without merit, and all of them are dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.