The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The circumstance, etc. where the defendant confessions all of the crimes is recognized.

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant had the same criminal record at several times; (b) the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes for a repeated offense committed by the same criminal record; (c) the Defendant committed the instant crimes for a short period of time; and (d) the Defendant repeated the instant crimes within the short period; and (c) the Defendant’s age, sex and family environment; (d) motive, means and consequence of the instant crimes; and (e) the circumstances after the instant crimes were committed, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion is groundless.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition (Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act: Provided, That the first head of the crime of the lower judgment that “the execution of the sentence was terminated at the Suwon Detention House on June 14, 2017,” of the first head of the crime of the lower judgment, is a clerical error of “after the aforementioned judgment became final and conclusive on June 21, 2017, and the execution of the sentence was terminated on the same day after the release from the Suwon Detention House on June 14, 2017,” and it is evident that “the result of the prisoner’s search” was omitted in “the previous record of the judgment on June 1, 200” column of the summary of evidence, and thus, it is corrected or added ex officio pursuant to