2. The judgment was based on the circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the confession of the crime of this case and the fact that the defendant recognized his mistake, the fact that there was no record of punishment for the same crime, and the period of operation of the illegal game of this case does not exceed four days. However, the crime of this case is a business that the defendant installed game products in collusion with B, etc. and exchanged the result obtained through the act of exchanging the result of the crime of this case as a business. Such exchange act is highly likely to cause harm to the society by encouraging excessive speculative spirit to the general public, and there is a need to strictly punish the crime because it is not eradicated despite continuous control, it is necessary that the law of punishment is planned and organized by the court below, such as conducting business on the ground of the name of the defendant in preparation for the control, and the size of the illegal game of this case is not significant, and considering all kinds of sentencing conditions such as the motive and circumstance of the crime of this case and the circumstances after the crime of this case, etc., the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is unreasonable.

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.