The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentencing of the lower court (one year of imprisonment, one year of confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Although there are circumstances that can be considered in light of the circumstances, such as when the defendant committed the instant crime, when she divided the instant crime, and when the theft amount is a small amount, there are no special circumstances that can be changed in the court below’s determination of punishment by reflecting all of the circumstances.

On the other hand, the Defendant committed the instant crime even though he/she was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on the grounds that he/she invadeds on the victim’s residence among multi-households that he/she lives on a leased basis and stolen property, and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on the grounds that he/she committed a special larceny in 202, and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on the grounds that he/she violated the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective, deadly weapons, etc.), and on May 24, 2014, during the suspended sentence period of which the above judgment became final and conclusive on May 24, 2014, the Defendant committed the instant crime, which was not agreed with the victim, and was not recovered from damage, and other various circumstances that are the conditions of sentencing specified in the records and arguments, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence after the crime, etc., the sentencing of the lower court is within reasonable

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.