The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable because it is too large that the punishment of the court below (one year of imprisonment and one-year increase in the number of years, one-year return of the victim)

2. The fact that the victim E-owned mobile phone period has been returned to the victim and the damage has been compensated, and that the defendant's two bicycles that the defendant stolen are likely to be returned to the victims due to the seizure may be considered as sentencing factors favorable to the defendant.

However, in light of the fact that the crime of this case was committed on more than two occasions, and that there were many times of the crimes, such as theft of intrusion on residence, and that there were many times of the crimes, such as the Defendant’s preparing a plan in advance and committing night intrusion larceny, and that there were many criminal records, such as punishment of the same kind of crime, ten times of probation, one time of a fine, and one time of a fine, and the risk of recidivism is high, and that the Defendant did not reach an agreement with the victims until the trial of the case, the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

3. Accordingly, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is groundless.