The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. On Aug. 30, 2018, the defendant submitted a petition of appeal on Aug. 30, 2018, stated unfair sentencing as grounds for appeal, and thereafter, on Jan. 10, 2020, the defendant did not submit the statement of grounds for appeal within the submission period for the statement of grounds for appeal on Apr. 29, 2020, asserting that there is a new ground for appeal, misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (only the defendant committed a larceny by himself/herself, and does not constitute a special larceny, because it does not constitute a larceny, in combination with D) while submitting the statement of grounds for appeal. This cannot be deemed a legitimate ground for appeal.

Furthermore, even if examining the above assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the defendant can be found to have stolen the victim's property in collaboration with D, according to the defendant's investigative agency and court statement, statement in D's investigative agency, field evidence photograph (CCTV flaf photograph), etc. Therefore, it is difficult to view the judgment of the court below that there was an

The punishment of the court below (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The degree of damage suffered by the victim is minor and the defendant agreed with the victim is favorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant had been sentenced to imprisonment several times due to the crime of larceny, robbery, etc., and even if he was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor due to fraud, etc. after being released, he was in the period of repeated crime after being released, the fact that he went to the crime of this case is disadvantageous.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the circumstances leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and the environment, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable and unreasonable. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the conclusion is groundless.