The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

A. Error of facts and misapprehension of legal principles could have been sentenced to a suspended sentence as the period of suspended execution was expired at the time the judgment of the court below was rendered, but the court below rendered a sentence on the grounds that the defendant was the period of suspended execution.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Since Article 32(2) of the ex officio determination of criminal law provides that “the punishment of accessories shall be mitigated to less than that of the principal offender,” the accessories constitute grounds for the requisite mitigation.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in determining the punishment of the crime of opening and maintaining a gambling space, which constitutes an accessory crime, and the legal mitigation under the above provision has not been made.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.

3. According to the Do and the record of the period of suspension of execution, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of suspension of execution on November 21, 2018 by imprisonment with labor for a violation of electronic financial transactions at the Seoul Southern District Court on November 29, 2018 and the judgment became final and conclusive on November 29, 2018. Therefore, it is clear that one year of suspension of execution has passed since the date of the original judgment, which was the date of the original judgment, was based on February 5, 2020.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below was erroneous under the premise that the period of suspended execution against the defendant was not excessive, and thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained in this respect.

4. The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) and (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with the above reasons for ex officio reversal, and the defendant's assertion of mistake and misapprehension of legal principles also

[Discied Judgment] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by this court and summary of evidence are as follows: 9 to 11 of the judgment below.