The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence (one year of imprisonment and confiscation) imposed by the court below on the summary of the reasons for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment appears to have the attitude of reflecting the Defendant’s criminal act while recognizing the Defendant’s criminal act, and the actual damage caused by each of the crimes of this case is almost little (in the case of the attempted attempted crime, such violation is favorable to the Defendant.

However, even if the defendant had been punished five times or more for the same crime, he was sentenced to imprisonment for each of the crimes of this case in light of the applicable law of the crime of this case, and the crime of this case is not good (at night, by intrusion upon another person's residence, theft of things, scambling another house, cutting off in advance another house's crime prevention window and cutting it back immediately thereafter, by dricking off another house's house, and then cutting it into an attempted crime). The court below seems to have set the lowest sentence against the defendant within the applicable range (at least one year but not more than ten years), and other circumstances, such as the circumstances, means and methods of the crime of this case, the circumstances after the crime, the age, scambling, and environment of the defendant, etc., and other circumstances, which are the conditions for sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act as shown in the records and arguments of this case, are too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.