The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The court below accepted the facts charged in this case and convicted the defendant, although the defendant used the money preserved for the victim by an agreement with the victim and did not embezzled it. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds of unfair sentencing (the fine of KRW 1,500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court’s judgment that found the Defendant guilty of the instant charges is justifiable, and there was no error of misunderstanding of facts as alleged by the Defendant, on the grounds that: (a) KRW 18,018,940, which the Defendant received as farming compensation, etc. from September 7, 201 to February 1, 201, stored KRW 5,967,235 out of the said money for the victim; and (b) around that time, it can be recognized that the Defendant embezzled KRW 3,967,235 out of the said money for personal purposes, such as the Defendant’s church operation expenses, etc.

B. Although the Defendant made a considerable effort to receive the farming compensation of this case for a considerable period of time, the amount of embezzlement of this case does not exceed a relatively significant amount, considering the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant’s failure to pay the amount of damage to the victim and did not reach an agreement with the victim; and (b) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, and circumstances after the crime, etc., which are conditions for sentencing as indicated in the instant case, the lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable. Therefore

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