업무상횡령등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
The gist of the reasons for appeal by the prosecutor is that the punishment (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 40 hours of community service) of the judgment of the court below is too uneasy and unreasonable.
The fact that the sum of embezzlement by the Defendant exceeds KRW 28 million, the fact that the Defendant served in another dental hospital even after being investigated by the investigative agency due to occupational embezzlement of the victim D, by deceiving the victim J and fraudulently deceiving the joint money for file, and the fact that the Defendant is in an unfaithful investigation and trial is disadvantageous to the Defendant.
However, taking account of the following factors: (a) the Defendant repaid the victim D the amount of damage KRW 15.6 million to the victim KRW 6 million; (b) the victim J and the Defendant agreed that only one time of punishment for larceny; (c) the Defendant has no specific criminal power other than the punishment imposed once by larceny; (d) the Defendant has to care for the young children after divorce; (c) the Defendant is against the mistake; and (d) other factors of sentencing as indicated in the instant argument, such as the method of and background about the instant crime; and (e) the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower judgment’s punishment is deemed unreasonable, and thus, the Prosecutor’s assertion is without merit
Therefore, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.