The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. As to the grounds for appeal of this case, the Defendant’s recognition of the crime of this case is against the Defendant, and the amount of damage to the crime of this case does not exceed the amount of damage, and the fact that part of the crime was committed against the attempted crime is considered in favor of the Defendant.

However, the Defendant committed the instant crime on March 15, 2014 immediately after the execution of a sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for the same kind of crime, in particular, following the completion of imprisonment with prison labor for a two-year period of time on March 15, 2014. The instant crime was committed by the Defendant. The instant crime was committed by: (a) checking that the Defendant returned to a house habitually; (b) opening a window or entrance without correction; and (c) taking into account the method of the crime and its risk; (d) it is not good to commit the crime; (c) it was not agreed with the victims; and (d) certain damaged goods were returned to the victims at the investigation stage, and there is no circumstance to deem that the damage recovery measure was taken, except for those that partial damaged goods were temporarily returned to the victims; and (e) taking account of various sentencing conditions indicated in the records, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, family relationship, the background and motive of the crime, details and degree of specific participation, and circumstances after the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed unfair to be deemed unfair.

2. 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.