2. It is recognized that the Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes and reflects the fact that the Defendant did not have the same criminal record, and only the Defendant was punished twice by a relatively minor fine.

On the other hand, the crime of this case is established when the defendant operates the game room and provides the game to customers and exchanged the result of the game. Such illegal game room business is in need of strict punishment by promoting the gambling spirit of the general public and causing the failure of home economy. The game room business of this case is established at 70 prices, and the entrance of the game room of this case is installed at 5 prices, and it cannot be said that the defendant's crime is deemed intentional and planned, and the defendant was committed in light of the above facilities and size, etc., and considering the above facilities and size, etc., the crime of this case is deemed to have been committed intentionally and planned, the defendant went to exchange business to obtain large profits in a short time with knowledge of illegality, and the actual operating profits are considered to be greater than the amount confirmed in the investigation process.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the circumstances and result of the instant crime, the circumstances following the instant crime, the character and conduct, environment, and age of the Defendant, etc., as well as the conditions of sentencing as shown in the instant records and pleadings, it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too heavy or unreasonable.

Therefore, prosecutor and defendant's assertion are without merit.

3. If so, the appeal by the prosecutor and the defendant is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.