2. The instant crime committed by the Defendant, in collusion with C, provided a total of 55 game apparatuses to customers with a free voucher per scores obtained through the use of the game product. If customers request to exchange the game product, the crime of this case is not likely to be committed by the Defendant, such as the number of the installed game machine and the period of operation by the head of the game room is about six months.

However, the Defendant is the first offender, and the Defendant recognized the instant crime at the time of the trial, and after the sentence of the lower judgment, the Defendant was employed in a vessel processing company and the risk of repeating the crime is low.

I seem to appear.

In addition, taking account of the fact that the equity in sentencing with C, an accomplice, should be considered, as well as various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, gender and environment, motive, means and consequence of a crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentence is too uneasible and unreasonable.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.