The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The crime of this case is a circumstance favorable to the defendant, where there are some circumstances to consider in the motive that the defendant committed a larceny for living among economically difficult circumstances, and that the defendant repents his mistake and reflects his mistake.

However, even though the Defendant had had had been sentenced seven times or more including imprisonment for the same criminal record and had been sentenced to punishment, the Defendant again committed the instant crime. The instant crime is deemed to have opened a bath object and has stolen damaged goods three times or more between the imprisoned and the imprisoned, and is not sufficient to recover damage to the victims. The lower court seems to have sentenced the maximum sentence of the recommended sentence in the sentencing guidelines by deeming the instant crime as a living crime. In full view of the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, and all the sentencing conditions shown in the instant records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime, it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the lower court is unreasonable.

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