The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. There are circumstances that can be considered in light of the circumstances of the Defendant, such as: (a) the Defendant recognized the Defendant’s wrong judgment; (b) the Defendant, who did not find jobs after release, appears to have caused the instant crime because he could not resolve the problem of basic food awareness; (c) the consequence of the instant crime is relatively minor; and (d) the Defendant used money acquired by the Defendant as a major purpose of solving board and lodging, etc.

However, the defendant committed the crime of this case since one month has not passed since the execution of punishment was completed due to larceny, etc.; the defendant had a number of criminal records including seven previous criminal records sentenced to punishment due to larceny, etc.; the defendant was employed as a convenience store employee as well as the defendant's previous criminal records, such as larceny in one year and six months prior to the previous punishment; and the defendant did not take any measures to recover from damage to the crime of this case; and the victims want to be punished; taking full account of the defendant's age, family relation, criminal record, relationship, character and conduct, environment, means and method of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable. Thus, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

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.