The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (two years of suspended sentence in one and half years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment is based on the following facts: (a) four companies, including (f), G, J, I, and H, are practically one company of the defendant; (b) some of the embezzlement amount seems to have been actually used at the expense of the company; (c) the defendant discharged the total amount of the embezzlement amount to the damaged company; (d) the defendant was sentenced to a fine in violation of the Construction Business Act in 1992; (b) the crime of forging evidence is deemed to have no criminal record of punishment; (c) the crime of forging evidence is deemed to be serious; (d) the crime of forging evidence is not likely to interfere with the realization of appropriate criminal justice power; (d) the defendant listed the false staff in the crime of occupational embezzlement in this case and remitted funds for personal use; and (e) the defendant used funds for the purpose of personal use, etc.; and (e) the amount of damage caused by the crime of occupational embezzlement in this case is extremely high to KRW 1.36 million; (e) the defendant's motive and circumstances leading up to the change in the circumstances and circumstances of circumstances; (e.

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