The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than five months.

1. The punishment of the court below against the defendant of the summary of the grounds for appeal (a prison term of eight months) is too unreasonable (unfair sentencing). 2. The act of health class and multiple occupational embezzlements ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds of ex officio appeal

Even if the legal interests of damage are uniform, the form of a crime is identical, and if it is recognized that the series of acts is due to the realization of a single criminal intent, it is reasonable to view that the act of occupational embezzlement of the defendant in this case is one of the single crimes (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do3929, Sept. 28, 2005, etc.). The act of occupational embezzlement of the defendant in this case is deemed to be embezzlement of the money that the defendant received and retained as the price of the vehicle from the customer to use for private purposes, such as repayment of the loan, while working as a victim's employee, while the defendant serves as the victim's employee, while performing the duties of selling and collecting cars for the victim, and is deemed to be due to the realization of a single criminal intent. The act of occupational embezzlement in this case appears to be the same victim and both the means,

It is reasonable to view it.

However, the lower court held that each of the instant occupational embezzlements constituted concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the number of crimes, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment below is reversed, and it is again decided as follows, after pleading, on the ground that there is a ground for reversal ex officio as above.

[Re-written judgment] The criminal facts of the defendant and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are identical to the facts constituting the crime of the defendant and the summary of the evidence, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles of the Act and punishment concerning the facts constituting the crime;