The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) that the court below rendered against the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). As stated in the lower court, the Defendant is against the recognition of the instant crime, and his family members are able to take care of the Defendant who has intellectual disabilities, and are in the first place. However, in this case, the Defendant, who was sentenced three times due to the same larceny, steals another person's office, and thus, the Defendant, who was sentenced three times due to the same larceny, steals another person's office, despite the continued punishment, and thus, it is inevitable to pronounce a sentence for a certain period of time.

Although the court below agreed with three of the victims, it did not yet agree with the remaining one, there is no new circumstance to consider the sentencing after the sentence of the court below.

In addition, in full view of all the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, including the Defendant’s age, health, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, circumstances after the commission of the crime, records of the crime, and the details of the sentencing investigation of the lower court, the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of sentencing is without merit.

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