The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (one year and six months of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. It is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions compared to the judgment of the first instance court, if there is no change in the sentencing conditions, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The lower court determined a sentence against the Defendant by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendant (such as the fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime, the fact that the two of the instant thief crimes was committed against the Defendant, and the remaining crimes were committed against the attempted crime, and the amount of damage was not significant) and unfavorable circumstances (the Defendant already been punished several times for the same crime, in particular, the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes during the repeated crime period due to the same kind of crime, and the fact that the Defendant did not reach an agreement with the victims, etc.) and there is no special circumstance or change in circumstances that may be newly considered in the sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment is rendered.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive, background, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentencing of the lower court does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, and thus, does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is groundless.