Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year and two months, and by imprisonment with prison labor for six months.

A. Determination of the Defendants’ punishment (unfair punishment: imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months, and imprisonment with prison labor for eight months) is unreasonable.

B. The amount of punishment imposed against Defendant A is unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. While taking into account the fact that it is difficult to deem that Defendant A led to the crime, and that Defendant A does not seem to have obtained criminal proceeds, the lower court sentenced Defendant A to a punishment by taking into account the fact that the amount of money entered on the gambling site (187 billion won) is large, denying the crime, and not against the law, etc.

However, Defendant A recognizes the crime in the appellate court.

The crime was led.

There is no evidence that the criminal proceeds have been acquired mainly.

Although the sentencing criteria do not apply to the commercial concurrent relationship, if this court re-examines the sentencing factors and other factors that the sentencing criteria set forth in the sentencing criteria, the amount of the original sentence against Defendant A is somewhat inappropriate.

B. The lower court determined the Defendant B’s assertion of unfair sentencing, taking into account the confession of Defendant B and the offense for which judgment became final and conclusive simultaneously with the offense for which judgment became final and taking into account the number of means of access taken over and the transaction amount as favorable sentencing factors, and Defendant B led to the crime.

However, the crime of violation of the National Sports Promotion Act (Gambling, etc.) and the crime of this case, which became final and conclusive, was closely related.

Although the sentencing criteria do not apply to the latter concurrent crimes relationship under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code, if this court examines the sentencing factors and other factors of sentencing as set forth in the sentencing criteria, the amount of the original sentence against Defendant B is somewhat inappropriate.

3. The Defendants’ appeal is with merit.

Pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed, and it shall be judged again after pleading

Criminal facts

this Court recognizes the substance of the evidence and the summary thereof.