The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The lower court’s punishment (one year and six months of imprisonment) against the accused against the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the court below partially recognized the defendant's favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant recognized all of the crimes, the 28 victims and the 12 victims were first agreed at the court below, and the remaining 16 victims were deposited for the purpose of five victims, and there was no record of having been sentenced to punishment or imprisonment without prison labor or any heavier punishment for the same crime for the last ten years, etc. However, the crime of this case was committed in violation of the law of the crime, the number of crimes, and the amount of damage, and thus, theft of cash and precious metals. The crime of this case was committed in violation of the law of the crime, the number of crimes, and the amount of damage, which are very poor, still has a history of having been sentenced to punishment for the defendant several times as the same crime, and there was a history of having been a history of having been sentenced to punishment for the defendant several times as the same crime, and it is not recognized that the punishment of the court below is too unfair. Thus, the above assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

(However, in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, the “43,979,000 won” of the second 12th of the judgment of the court below shall be deemed to be “43,89,000 won”, and the “Articles 152 subparag. 1 and 3 of the Road Traffic Act” of the fourth 6th 152 shall be deemed to be “Article 152 subparag. 1 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act”, respectively, and shall be corrected.