The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the reasons for appeal (six months of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects the fact that the total amount of damage was not significant, and that the Defendant recovered all the 4 charges of bicycles, a damaged product, and that the 3rd price was returned, can be considered in the sentencing of the instant case.

However, in the instant case, the Defendant committed the instant crime even though he was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of special larceny under the same Act on July 16, 2014 and was sentenced to three months after the execution of the instant punishment was completed on January 8, 2015, which again committed the instant crime, and thus constitutes a repeated crime and a ground for suspended execution. Since the statutory punishment for special larceny is imprisonment with prison labor for more than one year but less than ten years, and eventually, the Defendant’s imprisonment with prison labor for six months cannot be deemed to be the most severe punishment for the Defendant, unless there exist any legal grounds otherwise.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.