The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, by misapprehending the legal principles and mistake of facts, was in a state of mental and physical weakness due to intellectual disability at the time of each of the instant crimes.

The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (two years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court as to the assertion of misunderstanding the facts or legal doctrine, it is recognized that the Defendant had an intellectual disability at the time of each of the instant crimes, but in light of the background leading up to each of the instant crimes, the Defendant’s behavior and circumstances before and after each of the instant crimes, etc., the Defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to intellectual disorder.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged by the defendant.

This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. As to the wrongful assertion of sentencing, the Defendant recognized all of the facts of the offense, the disabled in Grade 3 of the intellectual disability, and seems to have committed each of the crimes of this case in the economically difficult situation, there was no record of criminal punishment since 2009, which was held in the 2018 Highest 818 Case, and the damaged articles of special larceny were seized, and thus the victim was returned to the victim. 3-B of the judgment of the 2018 Highest 818 Highest 818 Case. 3-C of the judgment of the court below in the course of the investigation, the victim of intrusion theft of the structure at night expressed that he/she does not want the punishment of the defendant. 2018 Highest 818 Highest 3-C of the judgment of the court below.

In the course of sentencing investigation conducted in the court of first instance, there is a substantial attempt to commit special larceny in Section 2 of the Judgment of the 2018 Highest 818 Highest case.