The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the defendant recognizes his mistake and reflects his fault, and the degree of damage caused by each of the crimes of this case is not significant.

It is necessary to consider equity with the case where a judgment has been rendered concurrently with a crime of larceny (thief) in the judgment of the court below.

However, the defendant, who has been punished more than ten times due to theft, committed each of the crimes in this case even during the period of repeated crime due to larceny, etc.

The defendant did not agree with the victims.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime was committed, there is no special circumstance or circumstance that is newly considered in sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment, the sentence that the lower court rendered is too unreasonable and unreasonable.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant is groundless. It is so decided as per

[However, since the statutory punishment of the crime of larceny at night and larceny at night (Article 330 of the Criminal Act) is “a person who has been punished by imprisonment for not more than 10 years,” among the application of the statute of the lower judgment, the choice of “the pertinent Article of the Criminal Act and the choice of the punishment for the crime of 1.0” and “the choice of each penal provision for the crime of 1.0” is obvious that there is a clerical error. Accordingly, it shall be deleted ex officio pursuant to