The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The money kept in custody of the proceeds of 100 km (No. 2) seized scrap metal in the text of the judgment of the court below.

1. The sentence of 10 months sentenced by the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. In light of the following factors: (a) the Defendant’s mistake is against himself/herself; and (b) the Defendant agreed with some thief victims, the Defendant committed each of the instant offenses without being aware of the fact that he/she committed the instant crime; (c) the frequency of the instant larceny crimes is large; (d) the Defendant was a majority of the victims; (e) there is no change in circumstances in the circumstances at the trial; and (e) other various sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (e) the circumstances before and after the crime, etc., the sentencing by the lower court is too unreasonable.

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

[However, according to the general list of seized Articles, it is clear that “The amount of money kept for consideration of 100 km (No. 2) of seized scrap metal shall be returned to the person in whose name the victim has been injured,” and that “1. Return of victims and Article 333(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act” has been omitted in the application of the law, so it is corrected ex officio in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure.”