2. The instant crime is not a result-based value in that the amount of embezzlement exceeds 243 billion won in total.

In addition, the method of crime is intelligent, such as using so-called internship contract or falsely registering the same as outside directors, so it is not small to reflect the behavior value.

Furthermore, due to the instant case, the victim would pay KRW 200 million to E Co., Ltd., thereby preventing the damage.

These circumstances are disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant shows his attitude to confession and reflect the crime of this case.

The victims are substantially family companies of the defendant.

The Defendant appears to have recovered most of the damages by returning the considerable amount of embezzlement to the victim.

The defendant does not have any previous conviction except that there are two times the past records of fines imposed due to the violation of the Automobile Management Act.

These circumstances are favorable to the defendant.

In addition, considering the defendant's age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, relationship with the victim, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the punishment of the court below cannot be said to be too heavy in light of the circumstances after the crime.

3. According to the conclusion, the defendant's appeal of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

However, the part of the judgment below's second 14,15 " used arbitrarily for personal purposes while being transmitted and stored for the victim" is unnecessary for criminal facts, and it is corrected as "delivery was made ex officio in accordance with Article 25 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure", and paid KRW 1,192,850 in the same reason, and then withdrawn around that time.