The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

An application for remedy order shall be dismissed by an applicant for remedy order.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (six months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence) is deemed to be too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination on the unfair argument of sentencing is based on the following factors: (a) repeatedly committed a crime over a considerable period of time; (b) part of the damage was not recovered from the party to the trial; and (c) the fact that the victim did not receive a letter from the injured party is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, however, the court below should take into account the equity in the case of sentencing simultaneously with the case of occupational embezzlement as stated in the judgment of the court below which became final and conclusive, and the court below made efforts to recover damage, such as paying 14,00,000 won out of 22,568,360 won of embezzlement and paying 14,00,000 won out of 22,000 won of embezzlement in the judgment of the court below, and paying 1,00,000 won in the judgment of the court below, and the defendant has no other criminal history than the above criminal record, and there is a favorable circumstance for the defendant, such as the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, change of circumstances after the sentence of the court below, etc., it cannot be said that the sentence of the court below seems to be unfair because it seems to be within a reasonable and appropriate scope

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

3. The applicant for compensation seeking compensation of KRW 8,568,360 remaining after deducting part of the repayment amount from the above embezzlement. Thus, according to the records, the defendant continuously pays the amount of damage to the victim by continuously paying KRW 1,00,000 to the victim when the defendant was in a trial, and thus, it is not reasonable to issue an order for compensation as the scope of liability is not clear.

4. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the prosecutor’s appeal is without merit. The application for remedy order filed by the applicant for remedy order is dismissed in accordance with Articles 32(1)3 and 32(2) and 25(3)3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.