The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for three years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. The sentence of the lower court (three years of imprisonment) to the point of the reasons for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. In full view of the sentencing factors favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance agreed that the victim company would not want the punishment of the defendant, the defendant's primary offender, and the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflected against the defendant, and other sentencing factors as shown in the arguments of this case, including the age, character and conduct, the environment, the process and result of the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime, the sentencing of the court below against the defendant is unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is with merit.

Criminal facts

The summary of facts and evidence recognized by the court is the same as that of each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 356, 355 (1) (with respect to occupational embezzlement and comprehensive punishment), and 356 and 355 (2) of the Criminal Act (the occupation of occupational breach of trust and the choice of imprisonment);

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (in the previous case, taking into consideration the favorable circumstances to the defendant);