The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the first crime: imprisonment with prison labor for 4 months and the second crime of judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for 2 months) declared by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the court below revealed that the defendant committed a crime of aggressioning upon the defendant's mistake through confinement for about five months, that the defendant did not have any criminal record, that the amount of theft was 5,050 won, that the defendant agreed with the victim E in the trial, that the defendant agreed with the victim E in the trial, that the crime of intrusion upon the structure of the case of this case by the defendant was in a concurrent relationship with the crime for which the judgment of suspended execution became final and the crime of intrusion upon the building of this case by the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, but it is recognized that the defendant was in a concurrent relationship with the crime of larceny on September 11, 2012, and that the crime of aggression upon the defendant on September 26, 2012 was invaded on the elderly on two occasions by knowing that the defendant was an wire telephone necessary for voice

The judgment was rendered on March 2013, after being sentenced to a fine of KRW 300,00 for each of the 300,000,000,000 was sentenced to imprisonment for attempted larceny and intrusion upon residence on March 12, 2013. The judgment became final and conclusive on March 20, 2013. In addition, the crime of larceny in this case was committed again during the period of the suspension of execution, and the crime of intrusion upon another's building was committed in the same manner as that of another person's building in the previous crime and the crime committed in the same manner as that of the defendant's previous crime of intrusion upon residence, in full view of various circumstances, including the defendant's age, environment, character and conduct, the circumstances and motive leading to the crime in this case, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the above argument by the court below is not reasonable because it is too 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.