The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal by the defendant is too unreasonable that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. The fact that the judgment of the defendant led to the confession of the crime, and the amount of damage is not so significant is favorable to the defendant.

However, considering all of the sentencing conditions of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the instant crime, the range of guidelines for sentencing [the range of guidelines for sentencing on general property] as a whole, considering the following factors: (a) the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, family relationship, the motive and circumstance of the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, and the scope of guidelines for sentencing [the range of guidelines for sentencing] as well as the sentencing indicated in the criminal proceedings of this case, such as punishment for larceny was imposed again during the period of repeated crime; (b) the planning nature of the instant crime, such as removal of a theft prevention pattern attached to the object, which is held in advance; and (c) the stolen goods cannot be seen as a living-oriented crime because it is difficult to view it as an essential element; and (d) the Defendant’s attitude in the course of investigation and trial, etc.

The defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.