A. The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

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

2. The Defendant, while making a confession of the instant crime, reflects his mistake, and the instant crime is in a concurrent relationship between embezzlement for which judgment was rendered on February 11, 2017 and a group of concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, it is necessary to determine the punishment in consideration of equity with the case where judgment is rendered at the same time.

On the other hand, the defendant did not agree with the victim until the party's trial, and a large amount of damage caused by the crime of this case exceeds KRW 100 million is disadvantageous.

In addition, since there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that can be newly considered in sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment, the following facts are comprehensively considered in light of the records and various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant case, including the background of the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, the Defendant’s environment, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unfluent, and thus, the Defendant and the Prosecutor’s assertion is without merit

3. In conclusion, since the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, all of them are dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.