A. The lower court’s sentence (6 months of imprisonment and additional collection) against Defendant A (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable.

B. The above defendant C (misunderstanding of facts) provided meals in the game of this case to the game of this case, and was an employee engaged in cleaning the game of this case and the remaining straw, and there was no conspiracy or participation in the crime of illegal money exchange business of this case.

2. We examine the determination of the Defendant A’s unfair argument of sentencing, and the running period of the game room of this case is relatively short, and it appears that the Defendant did not have much profits from the aforementioned illegal business, and the Defendant appears to have an attitude to recognize and reflect his mistake, etc., favorable to the above Defendant.

However, the illegal game room business is highly harmful to society, such as promoting a speculative spirit of the general public and hindering sound labor practice. The above defendant provided 50 game machine and operated the game of this case directly with defendant B, and operated the game of this case jointly, the degree of participation in the crime is significant. The above defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year in April of imprisonment for the same kind of crime around February 2017. The above defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year in April of the above crime. The above crime of this case was resumed with the game machine, which was kept without seizure, and again committed the crime of this case during the suspended sentence of this case. In addition, considering the above defendant's age, sex, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances of the crime, circumstances after the crime, and whether there was change in circumstances after the sentence of the court below, the above defendant cannot be seen to be reasonable and reasonable within the extent of punishment.