The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment) by the lower court (e., two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In the judgment of the court below, although the defendant argued about the scale of embezzlement, the appellate court shows the attitude of reflecting the mistake by recognizing all the crimes of this case including the amount of embezzlement, the defendant first informed the victim B stock company of his embezzlement. The actual damage of the damaged company caused by each of the crimes of this case is KRW 20 million, the defendant has no power to commit the same crime or fine, the defendant has no power to commit the crime exceeding the same kind of fine, and the defendant has both his wifes and elementary school students who support the defendant.

However, considering the circumstances unfavorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant was in charge of the collection of goods price as the employee of the damaged company's business team, he/she embezzled the amount exceeding 1.2 billion won by collecting the goods price from the customer for a long period of more than six years from 2012 to 2018, and used it for personal purposes, such as the wife's coffee shop opening funds, etc., and that in the process, he/she forged one copy of the passbook issued in the name of the victimized company in the name of the victimized company, and did not constitute a crime in light of the circumstances of each of the crimes of this case, contents, results, etc., and it cannot be deemed that the defendant made a serious effort to recover the damaged company's damage. Considering the circumstances unfavorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the damaged company was seeking a severe punishment against the defendant due to the failure to receive the letter from the victimized company, and other factors such as sentencing in the trial process of this case, it cannot be deemed unfair because the court below's punishment imposed within

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed on the ground that it is without merit.

However, it is clear that the second 20th of the judgment of the court below is the error of “H”.