2. The business of a speculative game room, such as the instant crime, requires a very strict punishment of social harm, such as encouraging the public’s spirit of gambling and undermining the will to work.

The defendant not only has been punished several times, including punishment for the same crime, but also has committed each of the crimes in this case during the period of trial for the same crime and the period of repeated crime for the same crime.

On the other hand, while continuing to move a place to another person, the role of operating operators, employees, and money exchange companies was shared, and the nature of the crime is not good in light of the crime period, method, size, role of the defendant, etc.

The first instance court seems to have determined the punishment in consideration of the favorable circumstances of the defendant's assertion, and there is no special change in circumstances or circumstances that can be newly considered in sentencing.

In addition, in full view of the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances of crimes, details, results, and all the sentencing conditions shown in the records and pleadings, the first instance sentence is too unreasonable.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit