A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, and confiscation) on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the records of the instant case and various sentencing conditions indicated in the pleadings, such as: (a) no particular change of circumstances exists to consider sentencing following the lower judgment; (b) the number of means of access leased or kept by the Defendant; (c) the operation of the private bicycle and boat racing site aiding and abetting and abetting the Defendant’s general public’s spirit of gambling; and (d) there is a significant social harm, such as impairing the awareness of sound labor and impairing economic failure; and (e) the fact that the Defendant and the Prosecutor alleged as the grounds for appeal, even if considering the circumstances asserted as the grounds for appeal, the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or it is deemed that the Defendant’

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.