The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable;

2. Where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable for the appellate court to respect the sentencing of the first instance court.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Defendant is punished by a fine for another type of crime, not only twice but also the same has no record of crime.

However, each of the crimes of this case is an embezzlement of approximately one year and four months by using the nearest company funds of about 6.5 million won in total as entertainment expenses, etc. while engaging in the business of fund management of the victim company. In light of the circumstances and methods of the crime, the period and frequency of the crime, the amount of embezzlement, the place of using the embezzlement, etc., the crime is very bad.

In addition to the false tax declaration accompanying each of the crimes of this case, the victim company suffered considerable damage.

Defendant did not take any measure to recover damage.

Executive officers and employees of the victim company want to punish the defendant.

In addition to the above circumstances, comprehensively taking account of the following factors, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, background, means and consequence of the crime, etc., various sentencing conditions as shown in the instant pleadings (including the sentencing data added in the appellate trial) and the legal applicable sentences (one to 3 years from 40 years from imprisonment), etc., it is not deemed that the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

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