Judgment

The lower court, in light of the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, determined a sentence against the Defendant, considering the following: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime at once again during the period of repeated crime, and (b) the Defendant had a record of having been punished several times for the same kind of crime; (c) the amount of damage is relatively minor; (d) the amount of damage was recovered; and (e) the Defendant was returned to the victim; and (e) the Defendant was fully admitted to all of his criminal acts.

The sentencing of the court below seems to have been determined appropriately by fully taking into account the above various circumstances, and there is no special change in circumstances to be assessed differently from the sentencing conditions of the court below until the trial is held.

In addition, considering the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, family relations, criminal records, circumstances after the crime and the result of the crime, all the sentencing conditions shown in the arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime, it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable to escape the reasonable scope of discretion.

The defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

The appeal by the defendant is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since the appeal by the defendant is groundless.