2. The Defendants led to confession and reflect of depth of each of the crimes of this case; Defendant A committed a repeated crime in favor of the victim I and F, and agreed with them; Defendant B repeatedly committed a thief for three hours; Defendant B also opened clothes of public bath, and opened cash and credit card in the wall, etc., and used the same method as the former punished; Defendant B was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for the same thief on November 27, 201; Defendant B did not appear to have committed a repeated crime in favor of the victims; Defendant B’s assertion that each of the crimes of this case was committed during a period of three years and six months after the execution of the sentence was terminated; Defendant B did not appear to have been sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the same kind of thief on the following grounds: Defendant B did not appear to have been subject to punishment for each of the crimes of this case during a period of three years and six months after the enforcement of the sentence was terminated; Defendant B did not appear to have been able to have been able to recover the victims of fraud; Defendant B’s statements and grounds for sentencing sentencing.

3. In conclusion, 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.