The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (a prison term of four years and six months) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination is that the amount of damage caused by the instant property crime exceeds KRW 2 billion, and that the amount of damage recovered is extremely unfavorable to a part.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant has reached this court and reached an additional agreement with the victim gone corporation and M, and that there is no other criminal record until now is favorable.

In addition, considering all the circumstances of the instant crime, circumstances after the instant crime, Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, etc., and other various sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

3. Since the appeal by the defendant is well-grounded, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the appeal by the defendant is again ruled as follows.

【Grounds for a new judgment】 The facts constituting an offense and summary of evidence recognized by the court and the summary of the evidence are as stated in the corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant legal provisions for criminal facts, Articles 355(2) and 355(1) of the Criminal Act for the choice of punishment (voluntary points), Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of embezzlement), Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of fraud), Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act (the point of non-paid wages), Articles 43 subparag. 1-2 and 5(5) of the Act on the Protection, etc. of Dispatched Workers (the point of violation of the prohibition of dispatch of workers), each of imprisonment options

1. As to the crime of violation of the Act on the Protection, etc. of Dispatched Workers, Etc., which is one of the concurrent offenses for the sentencing of Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act, the sentencing guidelines are not set. Thus, the sentencing guidelines are not set for the crime of violation of the Act on the Protection, etc. of Workers, which is related to the concurrent offenses for which the sentencing guidelines are set.

1. Sentencing (1).