The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment factor is the sentencing factor favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant commits the crime of this case under the mental retardation of the Do, the fact that the defendant has grown in an unsound environment, and the fact that the amount of money that the defendant stolen or stolen is not significant.

On the other hand, the crime of this case committed by the defendant by thefting the wall from the wall at the wall of the criminal who is under the influence of alcohol and by deceiving the goods with the credit card located on the wall. The defendant committed the larceny or fraud of the same criminal during the period of repeated crime immediately after being released despite having had been punished several times of the same crime, and considering the defendant's intellectual level or mental state, it seems that it is necessary to promote rehabilitation through active social adaptation training or vocational training rather than medical treatment and custody. In full view of various circumstances such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, home environment, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the punishment imposed by the court below cannot be deemed to be unfair because it is too inappropriate.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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.