The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for not less than four months) of the lower court’s punishment (one year of suspended sentence for four months) is too unreasonable.

2. In full view of the arguments of this case and the reasons for sentencing indicated in the records, such as the following facts: (a) the Defendant’s stolen articles are minor and minor and agreed with the victim; (b) the liability of this case, which stolen the stolen articles by intrusion upon another’s business place at night, cannot be deemed to be minor; (c) the punishment of this case cannot be deemed to be statutory punishment for the larceny of night-time buildings; and (d) the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor and fines for the same kind of crime; and (e) the Defendant had the history of being sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor and fines for the same kind of crime, the lower court appears to have reasonably decided by fully considering all the circumstances including

3. As such, 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.

[However, in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, Article 342 of the Criminal Act (the point of larceny of night buildings) shall be amended to "Article 330 of the Criminal Act (the point of larceny of night buildings)" in the two pages, 13 and 14 of the decision of the court below.]