The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for two years and six months, confiscation) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant recognized the instant crime and divided his mistake.

From among the crimes of this case, five times of the crime of this case is an attempted crime and the amount of damage is not much significant.

Some victims of the instant crime were not punished by the Defendant.

The defendant's health status is not good because of the age of 68 years.

This is the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

However, the crime of this case is committed by the defendant who intrudes on the office 11 times and steals or attempted to steals property, and is not sufficient to commit the crime and commit the crime.

Despite the fact that the defendant was sentenced to punishment more than 12 times, and even though the period of repeated larceny was during which repeated larceny was committed, the defendant committed the crime of habitual larceny in this case more than 2 years after being released from prison.

There is no evidence that the defendant did not receive a letter from all victims, nor that the victims' economic damage has been actually recovered.

This is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive for committing a crime, means and method of committing a crime, and circumstances after committing a crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is without merit and thus dismissed pursuant to Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.