2. The judgment of the defendant partially recognized the circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant recognized and reflected the crime, and grow up in an unstable family environment, but the defendant committed a crime through several similar methods in a short period. However, the defendant's withdrawal of cash or purchased goods using a stolen-friendly card, the defendant did not reach an agreement with the victims or recover damage to the victims, the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence for the same crime, and the defendant was sentenced to a punishment again during the period of the suspended sentence, and the defendant committed each of the crimes in this case during the period of parole after the parole was released from the parole, and the defendant was living in the PC bank and so he was highly likely to repeat the crime without any special reasons, and the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, family relationship, circumstances after the crime, etc. are considered to be too unfair. Thus, the defendant and his defense counsel's allegation of unfair sentencing is without merit.

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

(However, in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, the judgment of the court below is ex officio in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure that "No. 16, 2014" was "No. 16, 2014," and "victim I" in the 14, and "victim R," respectively, shall be corrected.