2. The lower court, based on the following circumstances: (a) the crime of opening Internet gambling, which was conducted in a systematic and business manner by having a server in China, etc. and participating in multiple accomplices, is likely to cause social harm as a crime that undermines the spirit of majority citizens and undermines sound work awareness; (b) the Defendant’s office in China led and planned and executed the crime and led the crime in China; (c) the Defendant was not much in size of the gambling site operated by the Defendant; (d) the Defendant did not have the records of the same crime; (c) the Defendant did not have the records of the crime; and (d) took into account the favorable circumstances of the Defendant’s self-denunciation; and (d) imposed punishment by taking into account other various sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments, such as the Defendant’s criminal history, age, sex behavior, environment, motive

The grounds for the unfair sentencing of the defendant (the profits earned by the defendant through the crime of this case, the family relationship of the defendant and his family members suffering from the accomplice, the aggravation of the economic situation, and the possibility of recidivism of the defendant) are shown to be the reasons that the court below already considered in determining the punishment of the defendant, and the above conditions of sentencing have changed in the trial.

There is no circumstance to see the above sentencing conditions, and considering the above sentencing conditions, the sentence of the court below is determined to be reasonable within the reasonable scope of discretion.

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 on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.