The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The fact that the defendant's judgment on the grounds for appeal of this case is against the recognition of all the crimes of this case, the defendant's age is yet registered as a disabled person of class 3 with mental retardation disorder, the defendant's crime was committed to solve the board and the total amount of damage did not exceed the total amount of damage, etc. are considered in favor of the defendant.

However, the Defendant committed the instant crime at least five months after having been sentenced to imprisonment with labor for a year and three months on September 12, 2013 due to special larceny, etc. on September 12, 2013. The instant crime was committed by the Defendant by impairing another’s structure at night, such as a restaurant or a store, and thus, does not constitute a crime in light of the method of the crime and its risk. The Defendant committed the instant crime against many unspecified persons over a short period of time, and did not reach an agreement with the most victims, and did not specifically take measures to recover damage, taking into account various sentencing conditions indicated in the records, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, circumstances of the crime, and circumstances after the crime. It cannot be deemed that the lower court’s imprisonment with labor is unreasonable (one year).

2. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.