The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below (6 months of imprisonment and 2 years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable as to the summary of the grounds for appeal.

2. Under our criminal litigation law, which takes the principle of court-oriented trials and the principle of direct determination, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the first instance court sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The defendant shows an attitude to recognize and reflect each of the of the crimes in this case, and the defendant appears to have not acquired substantial benefits from each of the crimes in this case. However, the court below seems to have determined the punishment against the defendant in light of the above circumstances, and there is no change in circumstances to be considered in the sentencing after the sentence of the court below. Each of the crimes in this case is deemed to have been committed by the defendant who pretends the payment of the company's share capital registered as the representative director and stated it in the register of the above company, and the most recent payment of the share capital in this case is likely to undermine the equity order of the company and undermine the sound order of trade, and circumstances that are not likely to cause losses to the majority parties.

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.