The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination of sentencing is based on statutory penalty, discretionary determination that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors constituting conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing of the first instance court that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of directness taken by our Criminal Procedure Act and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, it is reasonable to reverse the unfair judgment of the first instance court only in cases where it is deemed that the judgment of the first instance court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively considering the conditions of sentencing in the course of the first instance sentencing review and the sentencing criteria, etc., or where it is deemed unfair to maintain the first instance sentencing as it is in full view of the materials newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing review.

In the absence of such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court in the absence of such exceptional circumstances.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015 (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court sentenced the above sentence to the Defendant by taking into account the favorable circumstances, such as: (a) the Defendant has repeatedly embezzled money for more than 94 years and forged documents for embezzlement; (b) the Defendant did not have much amount of KRW 180,000,000 in light of the relevant criminal law; (c) the Defendant agreed with the victim or did not recover from damage; and (d) the victim did not wish to punish the Defendant; (c) the Defendant recognized the Defendant’s mistake and voluntarily surrendered; and (d) the first offender who did not have any criminal record prior to the instant case. There was no special circumstance or change in circumstances that may be newly considered in sentencing in the trial; and (d) the Defendant’s age