The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. It is true that the defendant has conditions for sentencing favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case, the victims' damage was not severe, the Cheongyang Goyang 1 Park was returned to the victim E, and the defendant was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence for August 12, 2015 on the grounds that the defendant was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence in August 2015 due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving driving). When the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence, it is true that the defendant has conditions for sentencing favorable to the defendant.

However, in full view of the fact that the defendant had a record of criminal punishment several times, including the history of punishment for the same crime, and in particular, even though he had been under the suspension of the above execution period, the crime of this case was committed at the same time, and that the special larceny among the crimes of this case committed by this case was "a punishment for not less than one year but not more than ten years" and that the punishment for six months, which was sentenced by the court below, is the lowest sentence that can be sentenced by reducing the amount of the punishment for the defendant, and other various circumstances that are the conditions for the sentencing of this case, including the defendant's age, sex, environment, family relationship, etc., it is not recognized that the court below's punishment is too unreasonable, and therefore, the defendant and his defense counsel's allegation of the above punishment is without

3. 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. It is so decided as per Disposition.