2. The following circumstances are favorable: (a) the Defendant recognized his mistake; (b) the prior conviction of the judgment of the court below and the concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act should be considered at the same time in relation to the judgment; (c) the actual amount of damage to the victim out of the market price of the embezzled vehicle is about KRW 82 million; (d) the actual amount of damage to the victim appears to be causing approximately KRW 28 million; (e) on the other hand, there are several criminal records of fraud, including the criminal records of the Defendant; and (e) the Defendant did not agree with the victim; (b) the lower court appears to have determined the punishment by fully considering the favorable circumstances for the Defendant; and (c) the court seems to have determined the punishment by taking into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendant; and (d) there seems to have been no change of circumstances that could change the type of punishment with the judgment of the court below; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character, and environment, the Defendant’

3. In conclusion, 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.

However, in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, "1........." among concurrent offenders, "the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, Article 50 and the proviso of Article 42 of the Criminal Act" shall be deleted and corrected.

.