2. The sentencing factors favorable to the defendant are tension, such as the fact that the defendant's mistake was divided and reflected, and that the defendant does not repeat again, etc.

However, the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case except for the crimes of this case No. 1 annually, even though during the suspension of execution due to the same thief crime, in spite of the fact that the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case, and the robbery of the defendant committed the robbery by the defendant with a deadly weapon, and by threatening the victims by impairing the victims' residence by threateninging them, and thus, the nature of the crime is inadequate and the method of the crime is not good. The defendant's habitual larceny also stolen each property by impairing the victims' residence, and the crime is poor, and the crime is committed, and the damage recovery is not good, even if there are many damages caused by the defendant's crime, or the defendant did not receive a letter from the victims, and taking account of all the conditions of sentencing as shown in the arguments, such as the character and conduct of the defendant, the circumstances leading to the crime of this case, the means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., 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 since the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.