The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the reasons for appeal is that the original court’s punishment (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable;

2. Although there are circumstances that may be considered in light of the circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant's mistake is against himself/herself, the defendant committed the larceny due to economic difficulties, and the fact that the amount of damage is not high, the punishment of the court below is too unreasonable even if considering the above circumstances favorable to the defendant, considering the following factors: (a) the fact that the defendant committed the larceny immediately after being aware of the fact that there are many enemys punished for the same kind of crime, and even though they are over the period of repeated crime of the same kind; (b) there are no special changes after the decision of the court below was made; and (c) there are no special changes in circumstances after the decision of the court below; and (d) all the sentencing conditions in the records and arguments of this case, including the defendant's age, character, occupation and environment

Therefore, we cannot accept the defendant's above assertion.

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

(However, in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, ex officio the reasoning of the judgment of the court below for the larceny by night, “the theft by night housework” is corrected to be “the dismissal of a building by night.”