The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable in light of the following: (a) the Defendant directed to a very extreme life after release; (b) the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes; (c) there are circumstances to take into account the circumstances; (d) the Defendant is aged and the Defendant is unable to cope with aquatic life because health conditions have not been significantly good due to merger with urology and loss of urology, etc., the sentence (one year and six months of imprisonment) imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. There are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may be newly considered after the pronouncement of the judgment below.

In addition, the Defendant committed each of the instant offenses during the period of repeated larceny. Examining the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., including favorable or unfavorable circumstances, as well as all of the circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and consequence of the crime, and the reason for sentencing of the lower judgment, considering the various circumstances asserted by the Defendant on the grounds of appeal, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 25 (1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, since it is obvious that "the defendant's appeal is a clerical error of "Habitual larceny" in Article 15 and Article 16 of the Regulation on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes.