The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Although the judgment was made on the facts that each of the crimes of this case committed by the Defendant while living in a ward, it is against the Defendant’s depth and reflects the Defendant’s mistake, and that each of the special larceny and larceny crimes of this case can be deemed to be relatively minor. However, even though the Defendant had already been punished for a suspended sentence of imprisonment due to a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapon, etc.) in 2009, the Defendant committed the same kind of crime without among those who had been punished for a suspended sentence of imprisonment, and then again committed the crime of this case. In light of the risk, it is highly necessary to strictly punish the victim by taking into account all of the sentencing conditions favorable to the Defendant as seen earlier. The court below sentenced the Defendant to a mitigated sentence, taking into account the following factors: the Defendant’s motive and circumstances leading to each of the crimes of this case; the Defendant’s motive and circumstances leading to the crime of this case; and the Defendant’s occupation, character, and conduct, etc., and circumstances presented in the records.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.