The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

2. The Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, has the unique area of the first instance court as to the determination of sentencing. As such, in a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion,

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Considering the following circumstances, the Defendant’s mistake is against himself/herself, and the thief was returned to the victim, etc., considering the favorable circumstances of the Defendant: (a) the Defendant had the history of having been punished several times for the same kind of crime, such as theft, damage to property, and obstruction of performance of official duties; (b) the Defendant continued to commit the instant crime without being involved in the repeated crime of the same kind of crime; (c) the nature of the instant crime was very poor; and (d) the victims did not have been used from the victims, the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., it is difficult to deem that the lower court’s excessive punishment deviates from the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.