The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (two years of suspended sentence in one year and six months) declared by the court below is too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination of the instant embezzlement is a large amount of up to 4.5 million won, and the fact that the damage has not been recovered until now is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, there is room to view that the Defendant used the money in advance for the purpose of paying to the damaged company a certain amount of the embezzlement out of the refund of the purchase price of the forest of this case 1.3 billion won, other than the above embezzlement amount, was returned to the damaged company. The Defendant’s embezzlement of this case can also be deemed to have used the money in advance for the purpose of returning a certain amount of the damaged company again. The Defendant’s own punishment is also trying to compensate for the damages caused by the instant case (the employees given up the damaged company’s wage claim) by taking over the Defendant’s obligation of 420 million won, including the victimized company’s wage liability, etc. (the employees given up the damaged company’s wage claim). The Defendant was detained for about 6 months due to the instant case, and was in custody for about 6 months, and there was no specific criminal power, other favorable to the Defendant except for those punished twice due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act, and the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, circumstances leading to the instant crime, etc.

The prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

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