2. It is recognized that the judgment is based on the following facts: the defendant recognized the crime of this case; the defendant has no record of punishment for the same crime; and the defendant has a mother to support the defendant.

However, the above circumstances are deemed to have already been taken into account as factors of sentencing at the court below, the damage is not recovered even though the damage of the defendant was a considerable amount of damage caused by the defendant's crime, and there is no agreement with the victim. Taking into account all the circumstances of sentencing indicated in the records, such as equity with criminal punishment for other embezzlement crimes of a size similar to the crime of this case, the defendant's age, character and conduct, motive and circumstance leading to the crime of this case, and circumstances before and after the crime, even if considering the circumstances cited in the grounds of appeal, the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable. Thus, the above argument by the defendant is rejected.

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