2. The fact that the Defendant recognized each of the instant crimes and reflected, the Defendant did not have any record of being punished for the same kind of crime, and the Defendant was employed by the victim company and was unable to receive wages, etc. from around June 2013, which led to each of the instant crimes, and there are some circumstances to be taken into account in the motive. Each of the instant crimes is that the Defendant was sentenced to two years and six months of imprisonment at the Ulsan District Court on October 17, 2014 and three years of suspended execution and was sentenced to three years of imprisonment on October 25, 2014, and the relationship between the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (mariana) and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and the concurrent crimes under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, which are favorable to the Defendant.

However, in light of the Criminal Procedure Act and the degree of damage, each of the crimes of this case is a situation unfavorable to the defendant, such as the following: (a) the nature of the crime is not weak; (b) the amount of damage also exceeds 290,040,892 won in Koreanation; (c) the Defendant has consumed all the money acquired by the Defendant by means of repayment of debt; (d) the Defendant has not made a serious effort to pay damages; and (e) there was no agreement between the Defendant and the victim up to the trial; and (e) the

In full view of the above favorable circumstances and conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstances after the commission of the crime, and other various circumstances, which are conditions for sentencing as shown in the trial process, even if considering all favorable circumstances for the Defendant, it cannot be deemed unfair since the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable. Thus, the Defendant’s assertion 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.