The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentencing of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant is not subject to criminal punishment except for a suspended sentence on one occasion due to special larceny. When committing the instant crime, it is difficult to say that the method does not pose a risk because the Defendant stolen an article from an ordinary point where no one exists, and that the amount of damage is too high.

Under the agreement with the victim, the victim want not only the original judgment but also the defendant's wife up to the trial of the court, and the defendant still has a high room for improvement due to the age of majority.

However, even though the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence for special larceny, he again committed the special larceny crime of this case in the name of the place where the judgment became final and conclusive, and most of all, special larceny is subject to imprisonment, and the minimum of the statutory penalty is stipulated only one year, and even if the minimum of the statutory punishment is mitigated, it is six months in prison. Thus, six months of imprisonment sentenced by the court below is the lowest sentence that can be sentenced to the defendant.

The defendant's assertion that the sentencing of the court below is too unreasonable is not acceptable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.