2. The fact that the defendant led to confession and reflects by the judgment, and that some of the damaged money and valuables were temporarily returned to P is favorable to the defendant.

However, each of the crimes of this case was committed by the defendant with his accomplices in a disguised manner or independently, and was stolen on several occasions in the sum of money and valuables worth approximately KRW 6.6 million in cash, cultural products, tobacco, etc. within the convenience store, and the case is not somewhat weak; the defendant repaid damages or did not reach agreement with the victims; the defendant has been punished several times due to the same crime; the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case again even during the repeated period; the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court on Special Theft was applied by the Sentencing Committee; the sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Committee for Special Theft was applied from October to two years; the court below rendered a relatively low sentence within the scope of the recommended sentence, taking full account of the above favorable circumstances, such as the defendant's unfavorable circumstances, age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the sentence of the court below, and there is no special reason to change the sentencing after the sentence of the court below, it cannot be deemed that the sentence of this case is inappropriate.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion 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 it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.