The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the reasons for appeal (the crime No. 1 in its decision: imprisonment with prison labor for three months, and the crime No. 2 and No. 3 in its decision: imprisonment with prison labor for six months) is too unreasonable.

2. There are extenuating circumstances, such as the fact that the Defendant recognized all of the instant thief crimes and reflected, and that in the case of the instant thief crimes, the Defendant agreed with the victim.

However, the fact that the crime of special larceny in this case has not yet been recovered until the damage has not yet been recovered; the defendant was sentenced to a three-year suspended sentence due to special larceny, etc. on July 7, 2014, but committed another crime of larceny in this case and violation of the Military Service Act again during the suspended sentence period; in the case of special larceny in this case, the equity between the case where the court below rendered a judgment at the same time, such as the above special larceny, for which the court below became final and conclusive; in consideration of the circumstances favorable to the defendant, the court below set the maximum sentence within the scope of the punishment to be mitigated again; and in consideration of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and the theory of changes, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, circumstances after the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed unfair due to the absence of each sentence imposed by the court below.

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. It is so decided as per Disposition, since the defendant's appeal is without merit.