The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant C shall be reversed.

Defendant

C A person shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Defendant

B.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the court below to Defendant B (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below to Defendant C (two years of imprisonment with prison labor, three years of probation, one hundred and twenty hours of community service) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Defendant B (hereinafter in this paragraph, referred to as the “Defendant”) made efforts to recover damage by transferring all of the facts of the crime to Defendant B (hereinafter in this paragraph, referred to as the “Defendant”), W, a stock company established with the money embezzled by the Defendant and C, and the land purchased in its name and constructed real estate, etc. to the victimized company. The Defendant, upon investigating the facts of the crime, immediately recognized all of the crimes, provided relevant data to the victimized company, and immediately provided relevant data to the victimized company. The Defendant voluntarily surrendered to the investigating agency before the victimized company files a complaint, and the Defendant was the first offender with no criminal record.

On the other hand, each of the crimes of this case is an embezzlement of about 30 million won in collusion with the defendant, who is an accounting employee of the victimized company, for about 1 year and 1 month. After that, the defendant embezzled about 30 million won in total over 30 million won in collusion with the husband, and embezzlement of about 3.49 billion won in total over 54 years and 9 months in collusion with the husband, and embezzlement about 3.4 years and 54 times in collusion with the defendant, and there is a very heavy criminal liability in light of the criminal law, period, and scale of damage, etc., the circumstances after the crime are not good, such as using the money embezzled by the defendant and C as business funds or making a dead life. According to the claim of the victimized company, the defendants argued that the amount of recovery of the damage would be about 1.7 billion won in total when based on the market price of the real estate paid in kind by the defendant and C, but the value of the real estate which is the object of payment in kind, not the appraised value.