The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence of the lower court against the accused (a long-term term of one year and six months, a short-term of one year, and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Although the circumstances favorable to the defendant are partially recognized, such as the fact that the defendant recognized the crime and reflects on the fact that some damaged goods were returned to the victim, and that a considerable number of victims stated that they did not want punishment against the defendant, the above favorable circumstances appear to have already been reflected in the court below. The defendant had a record of being subject to juvenile protective disposition more than ten times in the juvenile reformatory, and the period of release from the juvenile reformatory has not yet passed, and the defendant committed larceny over several times in a short period. In light of the circumstances where the stolen cash or stolen goods were consumed by telecom, PC game expenses, external food expenses, taxi expenses, etc., the defendant seems to have been repeatedly prevented the larceny crime without any particular crime. The defendant appears to have a high risk of repeating the crime. The defendant's method of selecting the time and place of the crime, method of disposing the stolen goods, etc., most of the damages, most of them have been recovered, and the defendant's age, character and conduct, and other circumstances were not acknowledged after considering the following circumstances.

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