2. It is recognized that the judgment is based on the fact that the defendant was aware of and against the crime of this case, and that the defendant was merely an employee in the game of this case.

However, the crime of this case committed by the defendant as well as a game product that was not classified from June 16, 2012 to June 18, 2012, which was installed at 26 prices for the "sea open game machine", which was an electronic game machine, as an employee, and aiding and abetting B and C's gambling game room business. The illegal game room business is likely to undermine the people's sound labor awareness and cause property to be seriously damaged, and there is a great need for strict punishment because it is not eradicated despite continuous control. The game room of this case is a place where the defendant operated a secret game without trade name. The circumstances after the crime were not good, such as the defendant's attempt to escape from the crime of gambling at the time of regulating the game room of this case. Although the defendant was punished for the crime of gambling at around August 2006, the defendant did not seem to have been able to have committed the crime of this case, the circumstances of the defendant's age before and after the crime of this case, the circumstances of this case's character and behavior and circumstances, etc.

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.