The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant recognized all the facts charged of the instant case, considered in depth, and reflected, the victims expressed their intention not to have the cell phone returned from the Defendant and want to be punished, the actual damage was not yet caused by returning the stolen cell phone, and the Defendant transferred soup, brying, etc. without a certain address.

Considering the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime in one room, the sentence (six months of imprisonment) sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The fact that the defendant is against the judgment, and the victim's damage is minor and the victims do not want to be punished is favorable in sentencing. However, in addition, the defendant has been sentenced to a suspended sentence due to larceny, and even during the suspended sentence period, the defendant repeated the same criminal act by being sentenced to a fine on August 2013, and in full view of the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the criminal act, circumstances after the crime, etc., it is not deemed that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

The defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant is groundless. It is so decided as per Disposition