2. The judgment of the court below recognized all of the crimes of this case when the defendant was in the first instance, and the defendant promised to pay damages at the court below and agreed smoothly with the victim, etc. are favorable to the defendant.

However, as the head of the instant crime, the Defendant, who is engaged in the business of managing goods and their sales proceeds for the victim, embezzled an amount of 100 million won in total over a long period of time, and is highly poor in its nature in light of the method of crime, period of crime, and the scale of damage, etc., the Defendant continued to commit the instant crime even if he was given a warning from the injured party to faithfully and faithfully work, and the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for the same kind of crime in 209, and the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime; the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for the same type of crime in 209; the Defendant committed the instant crime; there was no change of circumstances that may otherwise determine the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime; and other various circumstances that are the conditions for the sentencing specified in the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, means and consequence after the commission of the crime, etc.,

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