2. The fact that the defendant recognized his mistake and speaks against the defendant, that the company operated by the victim incurred considerable property damage due to the decrease in the rehabilitation procedure, that the defendant seems to have caused the crime of this case, that there is no history of punishment exceeding the fine, that the defendant has no history of punishment exceeding the fine, and that the defendant is waiting to resume the business of the company without committing such a crime again in the future.

However, the court below did not recover from damage even though the amount that the defendant had taken over was a large amount of KRW 50 million, and the court below seems to have taken into account the above circumstances favorable to the defendant, and there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may be newly considered in sentencing after the decision of the court below was rendered. In full view of the circumstances leading up to the crime of this case, the circumstances after the crime of this case, the defendant's age, character and conduct, and environment, it is not recognized that the court below's punishment is too unreasonable, and therefore, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

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.