2. The fact that Defendant B paid a considerable amount of money to be determined and agreed with the victims is a favorable sentencing ground.

However, the crime of this case was committed jointly by the Defendants and committed property theft by making use of pipes such as pipe cutting machines at night. The crime of this case was committed in light of the time of the crime, the nature of the crime is very poor in light of the criminal act, the criminal act committed by the Defendants, and the Defendant A committed the crime of this case within the same repeated crime period. In the case of Defendant A, the court below seems to have determined the punishment by taking into account all favorable circumstances to the Defendants, and the court below submitted the statements that Defendant B paid additional KRW 30,000 to the victims and victims, but it is difficult to view that it is difficult to consider it as a new circumstance to reduce the punishment by taking account of various sentencing conditions shown in the arguments, such as the age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the motive and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the court below is recognized as appropriate. Thus, the above Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

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