A. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (the imprisonment of 10 months, the surcharge of 22 million won) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below on the defendant is too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination is recognized that the Defendant recognized the instant crime, and the Defendant did not lead the instant crime, and only shared the act of execution as a server manager of the instant gambling site, compared to the size and income of the instant criminal organization, the Defendant’s actual profits are relatively large, and it is recognized that the first offender is the first offender.

However, the establishment and operation of illegal gambling sites, such as the instant case, are highly harmful to society because they instigate excessive speculative spirit to many unspecified people and interfere with sound labor awareness. It is highly likely that the instant gambling site is not eradicated despite continuous crackdown, and thus requires strict punishment. The instant gambling site was operated in a systematic and professional manner by dividing the roles of the participants and dividing them into offices in China. The scale of gambling funds in transactions with the opening period is significant, and even though the Defendant was in charge of the instant crime, even though he was able to play an essential role in the implementation of the instant crime, it is also recognized that he escaped by avoiding police tracking and destroying relevant evidence.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances: Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive, background, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, equity in the punishment of accomplices, etc., and the fact that there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may change the sentencing of the lower court after the lower judgment, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too heavy or unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit. Thus, all appeals filed by the defendant and the prosecutor are in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.