The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months, by imprisonment for a maximum term of one year, and by a short term of eight months.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the punishment of the lower court (one and half years of imprisonment with prison labor, a maximum of one year and six months, and a short of one year) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Defendant A committed the instant crime, along with B, was found to have committed a theft of cash, etc. or attempted to steals at a restaurant or convenience store at least seven times in the middle of about two weeks, by intrusioning upon the restaurant or convenience store, and the crime is deemed to have a significant nature in light of the method of the crime and the period and frequency of the crime.

However, in light of the fact that the amount of damage caused by the instant crime is not relatively large, and that the Defendant agreed with the four victims in the first instance, that the Defendant did not repeat the crime while recognizing all the crimes from the investigative agency, that is, the juvenile is a juvenile, that there was no record of criminal punishment, but there was no record of criminal punishment, and that the Defendant’s character and behavior, environment, the background and motive leading up to the instant crime, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., as a whole, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

B. The crime of this case committed by Defendant B was committed by the Defendant by intrusioning upon a restaurant or convenience store at least seven weeks in the middle of about two weeks with A, and thus, the method of the crime, in light of the period and frequency of the crime, and the very significant nature of the crime, and the Defendant again committed the crime of this case during the period of suspension of execution even though he had the record of being punished twice as the same crime.

However, the amount of damage caused by the instant crime is not relatively much significant, and the damage recovery was made through accomplices A in the first instance, and the Defendant’s failure to repeat the instant crime is recognized by the investigative agency as a whole, and the Defendant is a juvenile, and the Defendant’s character and conduct, environment, the background and motive leading to the instant crime, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc.