2. We also examine the judgment and prosecutor’s improper claims for sentencing.

The victims of each of the crimes of this case are deemed to have suffered considerable damage due to the crime of this case, such as obtaining loans from the defendant in order to lend money to the defendant with the defendant's club fees or club fees, etc., and there are various circumstances where the defendant embezzled the amount equivalent to KRW 80 million in the position of managing members' wages, and thus, the nature of each of the crimes of this case and its possibility of criticism cannot be easily viewed.

On the other hand, around 2012, the defendant paid 55 million won to the victim's members of the above victim's embezzlement of occupational embezzlement against 21 victims, and the victim did not want the punishment of the defendant, the defendant took the attitude of recognizing and opposing the defendant's mistake, and the fact that the defendant has no criminal history, etc. should be taken into consideration in light of the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

In light of the above circumstances and other circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive for committing a crime and circumstances after committing a crime, and the result of the application of sentencing guidelines by the Supreme Court sentencing committee, the punishment sentenced by the court below is within the scope of the appropriate sentencing discretion.

The decision is judged.

3. As such, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.