2. Determination

A. According to the records, the court below set a sentence by taking into account various factors such as the number of crimes and the size of gambling funds, the number of criminal records in the case of Defendant A, the number of criminal records punished for the same kind of crime in the case of Defendant B, the number of criminal records in the case of Defendant B, the number of criminal records punished for the same kind of crime, the number of criminal records in the case of Defendant B, the number of criminal offenses in the same kind of crime in the case of Defendant B, the number of criminal errors, the victim in the case of Defendant B, the victim did not want the punishment, the victim did not want the punishment, and the equity in the case of judgment with the obstruction of the exercise of rights that became final and conclusive in the judgment of the court below.

B. Although there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original judgment as the new sentencing materials have not been submitted in the trial court, and considering various reasons for sentencing revealed in the oral proceedings, each of the lower judgment’s sentencing is too inappropriate and it does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

C. Therefore, the argument of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendants’ appeal 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.

(However, the judgment of the court below is clearly stated that “ August 30, 2017.” in Part 5 of Part 2 is a clerical error in the phrase “ February 9, 2018.” and thus, it ex officio is corrected in accordance with Article 25 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.