2. The fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflects it, the family members to support are expected to have difficulty in economic situation, and the consideration of equity when the judgment is rendered concurrently with the crime of acquiring stolens for which the judgment became final and conclusive is favorable.

However, in light of the law, content, frequency, etc., the crime of this case is not good, and the defendant appears to have acquired smartphones which are a large number of stolen goods in business, and the fact that the defendant has been punished more than 10 times due to the crime of this case is disadvantageous to others.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence, there is no special change in circumstances that make the sentence different from the original court’s sentencing conditions indicated in the records of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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