A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. We examine each of the grounds for unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor.

Considering the fact that the Defendant, as an accounting employee employed by the victim, committed the instant crime over a considerable period of time, committed the instant crime with trust in business, and embezzled money, the Defendant did not agree with the victim up to the trial, and did not repay the damage therefrom, and had a criminal record of the same kind as imprisonment one time and two times of fine, there is a need to strictly punish the Defendant.

On the other hand, there are favorable circumstances for the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant led to the confession of the crime and the considerable amount of the embezzlement is paid to the customer of the victim, and the actual profits that the defendant acquired are less than the amount of the embezzlement.

Ultimately, in full view of all the circumstances that led to the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, the circumstances leading to the instant crime, and the circumstances leading to the sentencing conditions indicated in the records, such as the circumstances after the crime, the sentence of the lower court is reasonable. Therefore, the above arguments by the Defendant and the

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.