The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal (not guilty part of the grounds of appeal) is that each of the crimes of this case was committed repeatedly by the same method in a short period, and thus, it is based on the realization of the defendant's theft habits, and considering the fact that the defendant had the record of receiving juvenile protective disposition twice due to special larceny, etc., the court below found the defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged, which is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts or in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the conclusion

2. According to the records, the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case repeatedly over 10 times from July 12, 2013 to July 29, 2013. However, each of the crimes of this case was committed within a relatively short period. The defendant was subject to juvenile protective disposition on October 31, 2006 and November 15, 2006, when he was under 15 years of age and was under 22 years of age since he received juvenile protective disposition due to special larceny, etc., and there was no history of larceny until 22 years of age, and the defendant was found to have committed each of the crimes of this case under the circumstances where he was pregnant, even though he was under pregnancy, even if he was unable to properly solve the board and lodging, it appears that he committed each of the crimes of this case by intrusioning on the J St Stae Park, K Park's rest area, coffee, coffee shop, etc., and the defendant did not err in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the charges of this case.

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