Defendant

The appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair punishment) of the original judgment (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

It is reasonable to take into account the following factors: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime and reflects his mistake in depth; (b) some of the instant crimes were revealed due to the confession of the Defendant and cooperation in investigation; and (c) the amount of damage is not relatively significant.

However, the crime of this case was committed repeatedly by the Defendant repeatedly intrudes on the residence of the victims located on the second floor, and thus, the nature of the crime is not good, except partial return of the damaged goods, and it seems that the damage has not been recovered until now, and there was no agreement with the victims. In particular, the crime of this case was committed without being aware of it during the period of repeated crime due to the same kind of crime, which is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

In this context, the scope of the recommended sentence with respect to the instant crime according to the sentencing guidelines established by the Sentencing Commission is from 2 years of imprisonment to 4 years, 4 years of repeated crime, 4 years of repeated crime, 5 years of repeated crime (no person), 5 years of imprisonment, decision-making on the recommended area (basic area), and the scope of the recommended sentence (2 years to 4 years), and other various sentencing conditions such as Defendant age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances surrounding the instant crime, and circumstances before and after the instant crime, it is not recognized that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

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.