횡령
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable in light of the fact that the Defendant did not peeped the victim's complaint work force even though he/she arbitrarily disposed of the victim's complaint work force without permission, and the damage has not been recovered, and the court below's punishment (1.5 million won of a fine and 1 year of suspended execution) is too uneasible.
2. In light of the above circumstances alleged by the prosecutor, the court below’s determination seems to have already been taken into account when determining the punishment at the court below. Moreover, the Defendant had no penal power exceeding the fine prior to the instant crime, and considering the various sentencing factors revealed in the proceedings of the instant case, such as the background leading up to the custody of the victim’s property and the background leading up to the disposition, etc., it does not seem that the sentencing of the court below exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because it is too unfasible.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor'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.