All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable because the Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant”)’s punishment is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (unfair sentencing)’s sentence is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. We also examine the judgment and prosecutor’s improper claims for sentencing.

All of the crimes of this case are recognized by the Defendant, and they are in violation of their depth, and the fact that the seized KRW 1 million appears to have been returned to the victims of each embezzlement of this case is favorable.

On the other hand, each of the instant crimes committed by the Defendant is very heavy in light of the method and frequency of the crime. In particular, the Defendant, as stated in paragraph (2) of the lower judgment (2017 high group 2405), knew that the money deposited in the account under the name of the Defendant was deposited due to the so-called phishing fraud, and embezzled it by transferring it, and if the Defendant is an accomplice of the so-called phishing fraud, he did not have a consignment relationship with the victims, and even if the Defendant withdraws the transferred money, it cannot be deemed as infringing on new legal interests since it was merely an act of the victim of the crime committed, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the crime of embezzlement as stated in paragraph (2) of the lower judgment (2017 high group 2405) was established, but most of the Defendant did not know that the Defendant was punished by imprisonment with prison labor, including 2017Do17494, Jul. 19, 2018).