2. It is recognized that the judgment is based on the following facts: the defendant's mistake is recognized and reflects the defendant's mistake, and the number of smartphones, a stolen by the defendant, is low.

However, the crime of this case is acknowledged that the defendant acquired stolen goods by means of purchasing smartphones lost from taxi engineers, and the defendant committed the crime of this case at least one month after the criminal punishment of fines was imposed on the same kind of crime on June 20, 2012 and on two occasions on February 19, 2013. In full view of all the sentencing factors as shown in the arguments of this case including the defendant's age, character and conduct, background of the crime of this case, circumstances after the crime, etc., it is not recognized that the court below's punishment is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

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