The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (two years and six months of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant acknowledges all of the crimes and repents his mistake.

Most of the defendants have committed a crime under drinking, and there are agreements with AF, one of the victims of quasi-Robbery.

Some night buildings theft crimes were committed in attempted crimes, and the amount of damage caused by each of the larceny crimes in this case is not significant.

These circumstances are favorable to the defendant.

Meanwhile, in 2007, the Defendant committed the instant larceny again as a repeated offender, despite having been sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for one year for larceny, etc. and one year for larceny, etc. in 2008.

In full view of the fact that the number of larcenys in this case reaches eight times, and that the criminal defendant committed a quasi-Robbery, there is a need to strictly punish the defendant.

In addition, there is no special change in circumstances in the past.

It is difficult for the court below to take more favorable measures against the defendant by imposing a maximum sentence after reducing the statutory penalty.

In addition to this point, the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable in light of various circumstances, such as the age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment of the defendant, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit.