Judgment

It is recognized that the defendant has no record of punishment exceeding punishment and fine for the same crime, and that the defendant's personal funds are used as expenses for the execution of the victim C's general meeting.

However, this case continues to be embezzled by using approximately KRW 230 million of funds of the victim for private purposes, such as personal debt repayment, from the time when the defendant served as the secretary general of the victim until the end of his term of office. Since the amount of unrepared substantial damage is not much about KRW 115 million, the nature of the crime is heavy.

B. There is no special circumstance that the original judgment and the punishment are different from the original judgment when ASEAN comes to the first instance.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, etc., various sentencing conditions as shown in the argument of the instant case, and the scope of recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee, the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.