The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the above punishment shall be imposed for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (the imprisonment of eight months) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination is an element of the Defendant’s crime, such as: (a) the instant larceny crime was committed more than 20 times; (b) the number of embezzlement crimes was committed four times; (c) the total period of the crime exceeds one year; (d) the damage recovery was almost not achieved; and (e) the facts constituting the crime of the instant larceny case, which was committed in the course of trial on a high group of 2014 high group of 1864 cases, is a crime that was committed in the course of trial.

However, there are circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as ① the fact that the defendant has grow up in a poor family environment and has yet to be aged 20, ② the fact that the defendant is against the age of 20, ③ the fact that the defendant does not have any other criminal records except for the case of juvenile protection which the defendant should be an adult.

On the other hand, the defendant expressed his intention to go to the military team when he is being in military service in a reflective statement submitted to this court, and served with the minimum living cost of 30,000 won as salary.

(f) a statement.

Although the defendant's defense counsel made a argument that the defendant's defense has a lack of decentralization, in light of the attitude of the whole crime of this case, such argument is difficult to easily understand.

Except for the fact that the defendant has no record of crime other than the case one time for juvenile protection at the age of 20 years, if only the content and result of the crime of this case are examined, it is difficult to view that the punishment is unfair as it is unreasonable.

However, even though the defendant was not a juvenile, the defendant has reached 20 years of age since he was not a juvenile, and considering the background of his growth, sentencing factors favorable to the defendant and future errors, etc., the defendant's "if he returns to society, he will not stop the same crime."

The future paths will be drawn up in the future.

It is more desirable to grant an opportunity to prove the word " once" on its own.

The defendant has already been in this case.