2. Although the Defendant made a confession, the crime of this case is deemed to have been administered by the Defendant, not only for the purpose of keeping phiphones at the request of another person, but also for the purpose of keeping phiphones, and the nature of the crime is very poor in terms of harm and risk of recidivism that may affect society, and there was a history of having been punished for a crime of the same kind in the past, even though it is not a crime of the same kind, in consideration of the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant, such as the crime committed during the repeated crime period due to habitual larceny, and all other sentencing conditions indicated in the records of this case, it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

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