The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The punishment of the court below (three years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, has a unique area of the first instance court regarding the determination of sentencing, and in cases where 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

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Defendant recognized and reflected the instant crime.

The defendant is an initial offender who has no criminal power.

However, the instant crime committed theft of approximately KRW 748,00,000,000 for about six years, and the period of the instant crime is for a long time and the amount of damage is so high that there is a high possibility of criticism against the Defendant.

The Defendant was unable to reach an agreement with the victim, and the damage was not fully recovered.

Although the defendant deposited KRW 100 million on behalf of the victim, it appears that it was reflected in the sentencing grounds of the court below, there is no new change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below in the trial.

(1) The Defendant asserts that the Defendant gave up retirement allowances of approximately KRW 30 million to be received from C, and that the Defendant paid the Defendant’s amount equivalent to the Defendant’s retirement allowances to the victim and paid the amount equivalent to the Defendant’s retirement allowances to the amount equivalent to the amount equivalent to the above retirement allowances. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge this, and even if such payment was made as above, it cannot be said that there is a new change in circumstances that could change the Defendant’s punishment in the trial due to the same circumstance in light of the total amount of damages (i.e., character, environment, motive, means and consequence of the Defendant’s crime). In full view of the sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s character

3. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal is justified.