업무상횡령
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. A favorable circumstance is that the Defendant reflects his mistake and is in an economically difficult position.
On the other hand, the period of the instant crime is long, and the amount of embezzlement is 139 million won in total.
There is no recovery of damage even before the job.
Even in 2005, there is a record of being sentenced to two years of suspended sentence for four months of embezzlement for occupational embezzlement.
The court below also decided a punishment in consideration of such favorable circumstances, and there is no new change in circumstances to be considered in sentencing after the sentence of the court below.
In addition, in full view of the circumstances of the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, etc., as well as the application of the sentencing guidelines by the Supreme Court sentencing committee, the lower court’s punishment is too too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion 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.