The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (one year and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable;

2. The Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, has the unique area of the first instance court as to the determination of sentencing. As such, in a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion,

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015 (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In light of the details of the Defendant’s transfer of KRW 20 million as the proceeds of transit revenues, it is difficult to readily conclude the crime of this case as a planned criminal act in favor of the Defendant, considering the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, including the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with labor, the Defendant has the same criminal power as the Defendant, including the suspension of the execution of imprisonment, and the total amount of damages is 180 million won (the Defendant asserted that he was unable to repay the amount of damages by embezzlement of E’s funds. However, it is difficult to actively consider the sentencing of this case as circumstances after the crime, etc.). Considering the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant, it is difficult to view that the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and other circumstances beyond the scope of oral discretion.

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.