The punishment of the court below (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. It is recognized that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects the mistake in depth, that the Defendant deposited 10 million won, which is a part of the amount of damage for the victimized company in the lower court, and that the Defendant did not have any criminal record other than a fine for a small amount of a crime of e-mail received around 1996.

However, the crime of this case is not less than 1 million won in light of the crime method and contents, etc., the crime of this case is very poor in light of the following: (a) the defendant conspired with the defendant who was the employee of the damage company as the co-defendant B who was the employee of the defendant's accounting; (b) embezzlement of about 79.8 million won of the funds of the damage company through the bank account in the name of the defendant by using the authorized certificate, etc. in collusion with the defendant as the employee of the damage company B; and (c) the defendant alone does not notify the damaged company of the request from the customer of the damage company for the manufacture of the product by violating his duties; and (d) the defendant acquired financial profits equivalent to 1 million won in consideration of the crime method and contents; (c) the degree of involvement in the defendant's conspiracy in the crime; (d) the defendant's participation in the crime; (e) the number of crimes; (e) the total amount of damage amount; and (e) the amount of profits directly acquired by the defendant; and (e) there are no special circumstances to change the sentencing of the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.