The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of this case’s sentencing conditions, it is unfair that the court below’s four-month punishment of imprisonment with prison labor, which the court below decided against the defendant, is too unreasonable.

2. The instant case pertains to the Defendant’s attempted to steal an article by intrusion upon the victim’s residence.

In light of ① favorable circumstances, the lower court sentenced the Defendant to a four-month imprisonment, taking into account the following: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime in favor of the Defendant; (b) the Defendant committed the instant crime; (c) the Defendant committed the instant crime; (d) the Defendant committed the instant crime, even though having been sentenced to imprisonment for six months with prison labor due to intrusion upon residence and larceny in 2012; and (e) the Defendant committed the instant crime again once again in 2016, even though he was sentenced to a fine.

In general, the sentencing of the lower court seems to have been appropriately determined by fully considering these points, and it is difficult to find out other special circumstances to change the sentence of the lower court.

Ultimately, the defendant's argument of sentencing is without merit.

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