The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Of the 2018 Go-Ma175 cases, the lower court did not steals the victims’ goods on the ground that each victim consented to the larceny crime against the victim E and J.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant argued to the same effect as the grounds for appeal in the lower court’s determination of mistake of facts.

As the court below properly explained on this issue based on E and J's legal statement, it is recognized that the defendant arbitrarily stolen with each of the items stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below, which was owned by the victims E and J without the consent of the victims E and J.

This part of the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

B. In an appellate trial on the assertion of unfair sentencing, some victims’ written agreements were additionally submitted.

However, in light of the conditions of sentencing as indicated in the instant records and arguments, including the Defendant’s criminal history, period of crime, frequency of crime and amount of damage, and the reasons for sentencing of the lower judgment, even if considering all the circumstances asserted by the Defendant as the grounds for appeal, including the written agreement additionally submitted by the appellate court, the lower court’s sentence cannot be deemed unreasonable.

We do not accept this part of the defendant's assertion.

3. Conclusion, pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.