2. We examine the reasoning of appeal. Each of the crimes of this case committed by the Defendants is not less than 73 tons in light of the content, method, frequency, etc. of the crime, and the total amount of the steel bars that were stolen in combination with Defendant A and Defendant B is about 59 tons in total, and the amount of damage was less than 28 million won (380 won/km) and about 22 million won (380 won/km) and about 380,000 won (380 won/km) if the victim sold it under a contract for collecting the residual residues adjacent to the steel, and the damage was not completely restored to the victim and the victim did not reach an agreement or complete recovery.

However, the defendants recognized each of the crimes of this case from the investigative agency and reflected their mistakes in depth, the defendants seem to have been stolen and the remainder of the scrap, and most of the proceeds from the stolen and sold by the defendants seems to have been used as a revolving expense with the members of the same department. The defendants deposited KRW 50,000 for the victim in the situation where the defendants did not follow the mid-to long-term cooperation agreement, and the defendants deposited KRW 2,00,000 for each of the crimes of this case in the first instance, Defendant A, and Defendant D additionally deposited KRW 2,00,000,000 for each of the crimes of this case, Defendant A and Defendant D did not have any history of criminal punishment, and Defendant C did not have any history of criminal punishment, and Defendant C did not have any history of other criminal punishment except for those punished once by a fine under the Act on Specialized Credit Business.