The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence of the lower court (crimes No. 1 through 6 of the List of Offenses No. 2 in the original judgment: Imprisonment with prison labor for six months, crimes No. 1 in the judgment of the lower court, and crimes No. 7 in the List of Offenses: Imprisonment with labor for four months, and crimes No. 3-5 in the judgment of the lower court: Imprisonment for eight months, and fine of three hundred thousand won) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant, who recognized the facts charged, is against the Defendant, and there are also crimes falling under latter concurrent crimes of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the degree of injury to the victim of the instant accident is not much serious.

In addition, the amount of damage to the insurance fraud and the larceny crime of this case is not high, and the victims of the theft crime and some victims of the theft crime of this case agree with the main victims of this case, and they do not want to be punished by the defendant.

However, the Defendant committed each of the crimes of this case during the period of repeated crime, was absent intentionally in the trial during the trial of the court below, and attempted to commit the larceny of this case during the period of escape. The nature of the crime of fraud of this case and larceny is not good.

In addition, the defendant has already been punished on three occasions due to the theft crime, two times due to the robbery, two times due to the unlicensed driving, and one time due to the accident, and there are many records of juvenile protective disposition due to the theft.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, environment, character and conduct, and circumstances after committing the crime, the lower court’s sentence is not deemed unreasonable.

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

Inasmuch as it is obvious that the omission of repeated offense to the “Aggravation of repeated crime” of the judgment of the court below is a clerical error, it would be correct to revise that part into Article 35 of the Criminal Act for fraud, attempted fraud, crime of unlicensed driving due to vehicle driving, crime of larceny.