2. A favorable circumstance is acknowledged, such as the following: (a) the Defendant led to the instant crime; (b) the Defendant made a confession of the instant crime; (c) the Defendant did not have any criminal record for the same type of crime; and (d) the Defendant did not have any other criminal record except the punishment by a previous criminal record in 2008; (c) the Defendant appears to have been given a chance to satise and satise the unity of the punishment for confinement life exceeding three months; and (d) the Defendant

However, in full view of the circumstances such as the promotion of an excessive spirit of gambling by the people, and that there is a great and continuous control, and thus there is a need for strict punishment. The defendant's direct operation of the game of this case and the running period up to 158 days, and that it is difficult to view that the nature of the crime is less severe in light of the size of business methods, such as the fact that the crime is committed by illegally exchanging the outcome of the game in addition to the business of the game room, and all other factors of sentencing such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the punishment imposed by the court below is unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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