All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The main point of the appeal grounds is that the sentence of the court below (two years of suspended execution to six months of imprisonment) is too heavy or too unhued (the defendant).

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The amount of the instant embezzlement was at least KRW 61,102,782, and the fact that the amount of the instant embezzlement was not agreed with the victim is unfavorable circumstances.

However, the fact that the defendant is recognized as committing the crime of this case and is against the defendant, that the defendant has no specific criminal history other than that sentenced to a fine twice for the crime of this case, and that some of the embezzlement of this case appears to have been disbursed for the benefit of the victim.

The court below appears to have determined the sentence of the court below in light of all the above circumstances, and there is no change in the sentencing conditions different from those of the court below in the first instance.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime, it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s punishment exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, or is too heavy and unreasonable.

The argument that the sentencing of the defendant and the prosecutor is unfair is all rejected.

3. The appeal filed by the Defendant and the prosecutor in conclusion is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.