The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The crime of this case is established in light of the following: (a) the Defendant, who was in charge of managing deposits, withdrawals, loans, etc. of the damaged bank, withdraws deposits exceeding KRW 5 billion and uses them as futures option investment funds, etc. for a period exceeding four years by arbitrarily terminating the accounts of customers; (b) the nature of the crime is very serious in light of the amount of embezzlement, the details and methods of the crime, the period and frequency of the crime, and the period and frequency of the crime; (c) the possibility of criticism by taking advantage of the trust between the damaged bank and its customers where the Defendant has been working for a long time; and (d) the Defendant’s crime of this case is likely to seriously undermine the general trust of the financial institutions, including the victimized bank, and its employees; and (e) the Defendant did not agree with the damaged bank or take all measures for the recovery of damage.

However, on the other hand, the defendant concealed the amount of embezzlement.

It is not revealed that the defendant used or stolenly, the actual amount of damage suffered by the victimized bank by embling the deposits of customers by embling them, which is about KRW 2.1 billion, the defendant reflects the defendant's depth, the defendant was a main agent with her husband and high school students, the defendant did not have any criminal history, and the defendant was suffering from considerable mental suffering in living for a long period of not less than eight years until her arrest, based on the defendant's age, character and behavior, family environment, the result of the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime of this case, etc., which are the conditions for sentencing as indicated in this case, the sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant is somewhat inappropriate.