The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal is that the defendant recognized the entire crime and reflects the fact that each of the crimes of this case is committed in light of the fact that the living penalty for the preparation of living expenses and the medical expenses of the husband, the victims' damage is minor, the growth environment and family environment of the defendant, the punishment of the court below (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Circumstances are favorable to the Defendant that the Defendant recognized the entire crime and reflects the fact that some of the damaged goods were restored to the victims, that the amount of damage to each crime is not significant, and that the Defendant was living in an unstable environment and that it appears that the Defendant could have caused the instant crime due to difficult living.

However, even though the defendant had been punished several times due to the same theft crime under the same law, the defendant resumed the crime only after having finished the execution of the preceding imprisonment with prison labor, and even though the detention warrant was dismissed, it is not against the fact that the defendant was arrested as part of the crime of this case, and that the victims did not pay any compensation is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of various sentencing conditions, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, background of the crime, and circumstances before and after the crime, even if considering the defendant's assertion, the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act for lack of grounds.