For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court affirmed the first instance judgment that acquitted the Defendant on the part of opening gambling space, on the grounds that it is difficult to recognize a functional control over the establishment of gambling space, and found the Defendant not guilty on the part of opening gambling room which was included in the above facts charged, and that there was no proof of crime as to the violation of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment among the facts charged

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the establishment of joint principal offenders.

On the other hand, the prosecutor appealed the entire judgment of the court below, but there is no statement in the petition of appeal or the appellate brief on the guilty part.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.