The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant’s crime of larceny No. 1 of the crime sight table No. 1 of the crime committed in the judgment of the court below by misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles is committed during the night time close to the sunrise and thus, it does not constitute an attempted larceny at night because it is difficult to see it at night because it is difficult to view it as night.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment, confiscation, and return of victims) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The phrase “at night” in Article 330 of the Criminal Act, which provides for a judgment of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, means from sunset to sunrise the following day, and it cannot be said that the general public has seen as night-time (see Supreme Court Decisions 2011Do1793, Oct. 27, 201; 2015Do5381, Aug. 27, 2015). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the crime of larceny as stipulated in Article 330 of the Criminal Act, which is committed on September 12, 2017, is committed on September 12, 2017; and the hours of flight at night, which is the place of the crime in this case, can be acknowledged as the facts that the general public had taken place at night (see Supreme Court Decision 201Do11793, Oct. 27, 2011).

Thus, the crime of attempted larceny at night was committed at night prior to sunrise.

Thus, even if the above crime was committed during the time close to the time of sunrise as alleged by the defendant, the defendant's above assertion by the defendant is without merit.

B. There is no record that the defendant misjudgments the defendant about the unfair argument of sentencing and has been punished for the same crime.

However, each of the above crimes was committed during the period of repeated crime due to occupational embezzlement, etc., which was committed by the defendant several times during the short term.

In addition, the damage has not been recovered.

In addition, the arguments of this case, such as the background of the crime of this case, the circumstances after the crime, the age of the defendant, the sexual conduct, and the environment, etc.