2. The crime of this case is a case where the defendant has entered several times a Chinese restaurant, stolen money and valuables, embezzled or stolen the money collected by disguised employment as a Chinese restaurant delivery agent, and purchased goods using the credit card received from the customer who delivered the food, and the number of crimes is high, and there are many legal interests in infringement.

In addition, the details of damage are not easy, and the quality of crime is also poor in light of the law on the receipt of crimes.

Although the Defendant had been sentenced to five times or more due to the same violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, he again committed the instant crime during the repeated crime period after the execution of the same crime was completed.

However, as a decision of unconstitutionality on a statutory provision which was originally applied to the defendant was rendered, there are extenuating circumstances to consider the defendant in favor of the victim, such as the fact that the statutory penalty was modified to the minor statutory provision, that some victims agreed to the indictment, and that some damaged goods were returned to the victims.

In full view of various sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, background of the instant crime, and circumstances after the instant crime, the prosecutor’s assertion is without merit, since the Defendant’s sentence imposed by the lower court is too uneasible and thus it cannot be deemed unreasonable to reverse it.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is dismissed on the ground of appeal.