The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) that the court below rendered against the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the defendant led to the confession of the instant crime and reflects his mistake, and the fact that the value of the stolen goods is a relatively small amount is favorable to the defendant.

However, there is a record that the defendant has been sentenced to one time of suspended execution and four times of fine due to the same crime, and that the defendant committed the crime in this case again for about two months after the judgment of suspended execution became final and conclusive, and that the defendant is disqualified for suspended execution is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition to the above circumstances and motive leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the age of the defendant, sexual conduct, family relationship, occupation, etc., and the circumstances constituting the conditions for sentencing as shown in the oral arguments, there is no change in circumstances to determine the sentence differently from the original judgment, and the scope of sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee / [the scope of recommending punishment / [the scope of punishment ] the basic area of larceny of types 2 (No. 6 months to 1 year and 6 months] (the person subject to special sentencing] without the basic area of punishment (the scope of punishment / 6 months to 6 months) (the special person subject to sentencing] : The scope of final sentencing in accordance with the sentencing guidelines set forth by the punishment guidelines: The remaining crimes against which no sentencing guidelines and sentencing guidelines were set are set are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. In full view of the above circumstances, the lower court’s sentence is too unfair, and the defendant’s allegation that the above punishment is unfair is rejected.

3. In conclusion, 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. It is so decided as per Disposition.