A. The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The Defendant, despite being aware of the use of a crime, such as an illegal gambling site, established a memorial corporation with a view to gaining profits, opened a financial account under the name of the corporation, and transferred the means of access to the relevant financial account.

Such an act itself is not only an act that seriously disturbs the financial transaction order, but also an act that is in danger of massing a large number of victims by using illegal gambling or painting crimes, etc., so strict punishment is required.

Even though the defendant committed the crime of this case for a long time in an secret and planned manner, it constitutes an element of sentencing unfavorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, all of the defendants recognize the crime of this case and have no record of punishment for the same crime.

In full view of the above elements of sentencing, the lower court determined the sentence against the Defendant, and there is no change in sentencing conditions that may be specially considered in the trial compared with the lower court.

In addition, comprehensively taking into account the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, criminal records, motive and background leading to the instant crime, benefits acquired by the Defendant from the instant crime, and circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is only within the reasonable scope of discretion, and is not deemed to be too heavy or unreasonable.

3. The appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.