The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the lower court (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The crime of this case is deemed to have been committed after the crime of this case is committed by embezzlement of a large amount of money equivalent to KRW 150 million for a period not exceeding one year and six months in order to mislead the Defendant to inflict losses on personal stock investment by working as a financial accounting officer of the victim company. The crime of this case is committed in light of the motive, content, methods, and amount of damage, etc. of the crime. The crime is not very good in light of the motive and content of the crime; the Defendant’s account deposit and withdrawal file of the victim company for the purpose of concealing the crime of embezzlement is corrected to forward it to the accounting office; and there is a good condition after the crime is committed.

The fact that it is difficult to see it, and that considerable part of the damage amount of the victim company is still not recovered, is disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant, who had no record of crime, tried to recover from damage, such as the fact that he later surrendersed to the investigative agency, later surrenders himself to the defendant, and repaid 390 million won out of the amount of damage to the victim company, and expressed his intent to waive the defendant's right to claim retirement allowances to the victim company, and that there are children who should provide support to the defendant is favorable to the defendant.

In addition, if 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, it is reasonable to respect it (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015) and other circumstances comprehensively examining the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, etc., which are the conditions of sentencing, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

The above assertion by the defendant is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so ordered as per Disposition.