The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

However, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant’s crime of embezzlement of this case can not be easily seen as having been committed in the amount of KRW 55 million, and the background and method of the crime are not good.

In addition, ① the Defendant had four identical criminal records, including the criminal records before the suspended sentence of imprisonment, ② When the Defendant was detained as the instant crime, the Defendant agreed on July 13, 2018 that the remainder of the agreed amount of KRW 55 million, out of the agreed amount, should be paid to the victim on July 13, 2018. Accordingly, the victim’s withdrawal of the complaint was submitted, and the Defendant received a conditional decision to release the deposit in the arrest register on the 14th of the same month. After which, considering the fact that the Defendant failed to comply with the agreed matters and the victim wanted to be punished, it is necessary to punish the Defendant accordingly.

① The fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime, ② the Defendant did not have any criminal record for a considerable period before and after the fine was imposed in 201, ③ the Defendant’s previous conviction before and after the judgment was rendered, and the Defendant’s side paid KRW 20 million to the victim on January 21, 2020, which is the date of the judgment, and further, the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 20 million to the victim, including KRW 10 million until February 29, 2020, which is the date of the judgment, and the Defendant expressed his intention not to punish the Defendant on the part of the victim, are considered favorable to the Defendant.

Based on the sentencing precedents of the same kind of case, the court below's sentence against the defendant is unreasonable, considering the various circumstances, which are the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the motive for the crime of relation to the victim of the age of the defendant and the circumstances after the crime of result.

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