The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In light of the relevant legal principles and evidence, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the establishment of embezzlement for occupational purposes, grounds for exclusion of illegality, and mistake of law, etc., as alleged in the grounds of appeal, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only a case where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for more than ten years has been imposed may be appealed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed against the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not legitimate grounds for appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.