The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant with mental disorder was in a state of mental disability at the time of committing the instant crime, due to a thief that could not be adjusted by Grade 3 or 3 with intellectual disability.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too heavy.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mental and physical disorder, the part that committed the instant crime was committed by a larceny habit which cannot be adjusted among the Defendant’s assertion is merely merely a confession of habitual larceny, which is the instant crime, and it cannot be deemed that the Defendant had a state of mental and physical disorder, which lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of committing the instant crime.

In addition, even if the fact that the defendant was a disabled person of Grade III with intellectual disability is acknowledged, in light of various circumstances, such as the background of the crime of this case, method of crime, the act of the defendant before and after the crime, the victim and the defendant's statement in the investigative agency, etc., it does not seem that the defendant had a weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to such disability at the time of

Therefore, we cannot accept any of the defendant's arguments in this part.

B. There is no circumstance to consider the Defendant as to the assertion of unfair sentencing, such as the Defendant’s confession of all his own crimes and reflects his own mistake in depth, and the Defendant’s use of the money that was stolen to Grade III intellectual disability for daily expenses.

However, even though the defendant has been punished by imprisonment with prison labor several times for the same crime, and one year has passed after the completion of prison life according to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, which is the same crime, committed the crime of this case, which is the same crime, again during the period of repeated crime, and even if he was aware that it was discovered after the crime of this case and was tracking from the police, damage recovery measures against the victims.