Just to point out that while indeed the proposed policy change is very much un-Hitlerlike, the OP says nothing about post-Munich Germany having him, or even the Nazi regime, at the helm. Good old Adolf was far from immortal in 1938-39, and as a matter of fact there is a nice juicy PoD just after Munich to remove him from the scene. On October 9, 1938, have Maurice Bavaud be on the right side of the street, in a good position to shoot Hitler. A lucky bullet perforates Hitler's heart, and he's alt-history.
The plausible successors (Goring and the Heer) were much more afraid than him to start a general war with the Entente or the USSR, and they won't do it without him in charge to give the order. If the choice is between a general war to plunder wealth from foreign states and redressing German economy by scaling down rearmament, they shall in all likelihood pick the latter. Breakneck rearmament was not necessary anyway if Barbarossa is not meant within a few years. Post-Munich CZS stays a formally independent German client state since the new leadership won't alienate the Entente by betraying Munich.
It just somewhat difficult to see why Germany does nothing against Poland, since to recover Danzig and the Corridor was a deeply felt aspiration of the German people. And with no German invasion of CZS, there shall be no British military guarantee of Poland, and in all likelihood, Entente willingness to make Munich II for Danzig and the Corridor. But perhaps the economic adjustment is enough to keep the new German leadership focused on domestic matters, and/or Poland is driven to accept German demands by lack of Entente support, and Germany gets back Danzig and a favorable settlement for the Corridor by peaceful means.