2. The Defendant recognized the instant crime and is against the law.

The profits actually acquired by the defendant through embezzlement seems to be less than KRW 90,000,000 on the check discount stated in the facts charged.

However, the crime of embezzlement of this case is not suitable in light of the circumstances and methods of the crime, since the defendant arbitrarily received a discount on the sum of face value 100 million won at the request of the defendant for delivery from the injured party to the price of the goods.

The Defendant again committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime, and did not receive until now from the victims of embezzlement and insult.

The lower court seems to have determined punishment by comprehensively taking into account the aforementioned various circumstances, Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime.

The sentencing of the lower court is within the reasonable scope of its discretion.

In addition, there is no change in sentencing conditions that can be newly considered in the trial.

Therefore, the punishment sentenced by the court below cannot be deemed to be unfair because it is too large.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit.