The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Although the Defendant recognized each of the instant larceny crimes, the Defendant committed the instant larceny again within the repeated crime period of not less than one year after having been sentenced to imprisonment not less than four times due to the same larceny crimes, and committed the instant larceny crimes. In the case of the instant larceny crimes, even if the statutory punishment was to be mitigated by taking into account the favorable circumstances of the Defendant with imprisonment for life or for not less than three years (Article 5-4(5) and (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes), the maximum punishment was sentenced to imprisonment for a limited term of one year and six months, considering the favorable circumstances of the Defendant, such as the fact that the lower court already agreed with the thief, and determined the lowest punishment by taking into account the favorable circumstances of the Defendant, such as the Defendant’s age, family environment, conditions before and after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable. Therefore, 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 it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.