2. In full view of various circumstances, including the fact that the Defendant embezzled KRW 23,858,00 from the victim D, and KRW 2,200,00 from the victim G, and that the amount actually repaid by the Defendant agreed with the victim G is merely KRW 400,000, and that the Defendant paid KRW 800,000 to the victim D while the Defendant actually repaid the victim D, and that the victim D wanted to impose a severe punishment even when the victim D was in the trial, and that the Defendant was punished twice for embezzlement or occupational embezzlement, and that there was a history of punishment for the Defendant’s age and behavior environment, etc., the lower court’s punishment is deemed appropriate, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion is not acceptable.

3. Accordingly, 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 groundless. It is so decided as per Disposition.