The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant was in a state of mental disorder or mental disorder at the time of committing the instant crime, in a state where mental judgment has deteriorated due to depression, a certificate of challenge, etc.

B. In light of the fact that the Defendant’s mistake of unreasonable sentencing is against the Defendant, the thieved car, which is a stolen victim, was returned to the victim E, and the Defendant suffered from mental illness, such as depression, closed saves, and saves due to violence after the school violence, etc., the punishment imposed by the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the background leading up to each of the crimes in this case, the contents of the defendant's statement about the mental disorder in the investigation agency, etc., it cannot be deemed that the defendant did not have or lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental illness at the time of each of the crimes in this case, and thus, the defendant's mental and physical disorder

B. Taking into account the circumstances alleged in the assertion of unfair sentencing, even if the Defendant asserts on the assertion of unfair sentencing, the Defendant has been committed several times in the past or has been punished for larceny (one time for the suspension of indictment and the suspension of guidance, two times juvenile protective dispositions, one time of fines, and one time for the suspension of execution of imprisonment). In particular, the lower court comprehensively takes account of all the circumstances that, on April 3, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced by the Busan High Court for three years to a suspended sentence of two years due to the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective deadly weapons, etc., damage, etc.), and larceny, etc., of which the judgment became final and conclusive and conclusive on April 11, 2013, again commits each of the instant crimes again within two years after the release, even during the suspended sentence period, and that the Defendant did not have impaired or agreed on damage to the victims, the Defendant’s character, conduct and environment of the Defendant, the background and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime.