The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (for 4 years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. The lower court: (a) took into account the following factors: (b) the Defendant, under unfavorable circumstances; (c) the Defendant was convicted of having been sentenced to imprisonment; (d) the Defendant returned to a siren vehicle in a situation in which more than six months have passed since the last release; (b) the Defendant repeated the theft by means of night-time intrusion; (c) some of the crimes committed in the course of the crime, which was damaged by the crime of this case; (d) the degree of damage caused by the instant crime is not insignificant; and (e) the damage was not recovered; and (b) the Defendant was sentenced to punishment against the Defendant within the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines set by the sentencing committee for the Supreme Court, taking into account the favorable circumstances; and (b) the Defendant

The sentencing of the lower court seems to have been conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion by fully taking into account the above various circumstances.

The circumstances alleged by the Defendant as unfair reasons for sentencing have already been fully considered in the process of determining the sentence as above, and there is no other special change in circumstances that make it possible for the lower court to change the sentencing.

The above assertion by the defendant is without merit.

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