A A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3 million, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5 million.

The above fines are imposed by the Defendants.

1. Defendant A, in collusion with C, D, E, F, etc., was aware that Defendant A opened and operated a private car gambling from around November 2014 to April 2016, as shown in the attached Table 1 list of crimes, and even from around January 2015 to around March 2016, Defendant A served as a prompt word, “assumptive”, such as transporting customers employed by C, etc. to receive each gambling site, and viewing the network while waiting for a vehicle.

Accordingly, Defendant A made it easy for Defendant A to commit crimes such as the above C, D, E, and F.

2. Defendant B, in collusion with D, E, and F, was aware that he opened and operated a private car gambling as in attached Table 2, Defendant B, with the knowledge that he had been employed from November 2014 to April 2016, served as a tentative name, such as transporting customers who find each gambling place as a car, and viewing the network while waiting in the vehicle.

Accordingly, Defendant B made it easy for Defendant B to commit crimes such as the above D, E, and F.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. A protocol concerning the examination of a suspect of each prosecution against D, G, or H;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of each police suspect to I, J, or K;

1. Each statement protocol with respect to L or M;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the report of investigation to accomplices;

1. The Defendants: pertinent legal provisions on criminal facts and the choice of punishment: Determination of fines under Articles 247 and 32 of the Criminal Act; and the choice of fines (the amount of fines shall be calculated as above, taking into account the economic environment of the Defendants, the equity of punishment among the accomplices including the Defendants, on the premise that the Defendants received profits that the Defendants did not have received as a result of each of the instant crimes, and the period and frequency of each of the instant crimes are not much

1. The Defendants to be mitigated: Articles 32(2) and 55(1)6 of the Criminal Act

1. Defendants who are subject to aggravated concurrent crimes: the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2 and Article 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants to be detained in the workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: Each Criminal Procedure Act.