A. Defendant 1) Although the amount embezzled by the Defendant’s misunderstanding of facts is about KRW 20 million, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged that the Defendant embezzled KRW 50,868,700, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, such as G’s legal statement on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the fact that the Defendant arbitrarily used the total amount of KRW 50,868,700, which was kept on duty for the victim limited liability company D over 31 times from December 21, 2007 to April 10, 2015 can be sufficiently recognized. Thus, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

B. We examine the judgment on the unjust argument of sentencing between both parties, the fact that the defendant deposited 6 million won for the victim, and the victim paid after deducting a certain amount of the Defendant’s wages, thereby partly recovering the victim’s damage.

However, the crime of this case is a situation unfavorable to the defendant, where the defendant embezzleds the funds of the victim amounting to 50,868,700 won through taking advantage of his occupational status for a long time, and the nature of the crime is not good, and the victim wants to punish the defendant.

In addition, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the original judgment, and considering all the sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments of this case, the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unfluent so that it cannot be deemed unfair. Thus, the above assertion by the Defendant and the prosecutor is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit.