The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence of the court below (10 months of imprisonment) against the defendant on the summary of the reasons for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant are acknowledged, such as: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime while committing the instant crime; (b) a considerable number of thiefs have been returned; and (c) the Defendant entered the Republic of Korea around July 201 and has no record of criminal punishment until now; and (d) the Defendant was the first offender who had no record of criminal punishment.

However, the crime of this case is deemed to have stolen cell phones, precious metals, etc. by entering the victim's store, and the criminal liability is heavy in light of the frequency of the crime, theft amount, details of the crime, etc., the defendant did not agree with the victims, and the Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which adopts the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness, has the unique area of the first deliberation as to the determination of sentencing, and it is reasonable to respect it if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance trial and the sentencing of the first instance is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The circumstances favorable to the above recognized defendant do not fall under any special change of circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below after the sentence of the court below was sentenced, and it does not seem to be unfair for the court below to have imposed the defendant too much on the defendant, considering the circumstances that become the conditions for the sentencing in the argument of this case, such as the defendant's age, behavior, environment, etc.

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