The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The punishment sentenced by the court below (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

The defendant shows an attitude to recognize and reflect crimes.

Some of the damaged goods were seized and returned to the victim.

However, the crime of this case began again because one month has not passed since it had been punished several times due to the same crime.

Among the six-time crimes of this case, four times of the crimes of this case are crimes that have been locked with cutting machines.

The damage recovery was not performed properly.

In addition, considering the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive of crime, circumstances after crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

The judgment below

Article 5-4(5)1 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and Article 329 of the Criminal Act are clearly omitted in the corresponding provision of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes in the application of the correction of the judgment of the court below. As such, the omission of ex officio pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure is corrected as adding

The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act because it has no reason to appeal.