2. The judgment that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects the mistake, that the amount of damage caused by the instant crime is not a relatively large amount, and that the Defendant would not repeat the instant crime again.

It is hard to say that it is favorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, the crime of this case was committed by the defendant at night by destroying the entrance of the building, such as a pharmacy, and then theft of property equivalent to approximately KRW 700,000,00 in total, and thus, it was not easy for the defendant to be subject to criminal punishment several times due to the same crime even before. On December 17, 2015, the Daegu District Court sentenced the defendant to six months of imprisonment with prison labor for the purpose of larceny of night structures at night, etc. on May 15, 2016, and repeated the crime of this case without being aware of it during the period of repeated offense after the execution of the sentence was completed, and the damage was not recovered until the trial of the case. In the future, it is difficult to expect the recovery of the damage.

In full view of the above circumstances and other factors of sentencing, including the background of the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, and environment, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable as it is too unreasonable, and 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 grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.