The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) that the lower court sentenced the Defendant (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The rationale behind the lower judgment, such as the fact that the Defendant recognized his mistake, and the amount of damage, not only is relatively large, but also the fact that the damaged goods were entirely returned to the victim, can be partially recognized.

However, the Defendant had been punished nine times or more due to the crime of larceny and violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes. The Defendant again committed the instant crime that constitutes a repeated crime on only one month after having executed the final punishment and having been released therefrom. The instant crime was committed by the Defendant by means of the so-called “retailing” method, and thus, the Defendant committed a theft of the property located within the physical scope of another person, which could cause danger to another person in the course of committing the crime, and thus, is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

In light of these circumstances, in full view of all the sentencing conditions as shown in the arguments in the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and background of the crime, and the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the sentencing guidelines by the Supreme Court, it cannot be said that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit.