A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

A. (1) The judgment of the court below which recognized the crime of habitual gambling against the defendant on the ground that the defendant did not have any barriers to gambling, is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to habitual gambling, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

Shebly Sentencing Sentencing (one year of imprisonment) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s above sentence is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the legal principles of the defendant's assertion of habitual gambling, habitual gambling is a habit of repeated gambling and refers to the nature of the actor. In determining the existence of such habition, prior records and frequency of gambling are important. However, even if gambling prior records exist, if gambling is acknowledged, considering the nature and method of gambling, the size of gambling, and the form of gambling participating in the gambling, etc., it is difficult to recognize habitual gambling (see Supreme Court Decision 95Do955 delivered on July 11, 1995). In light of the above legal principles, the defendant's assertion that gambling behavior against the defendant was repeated, and based on evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant can be viewed as having only KRW 30,000,000,000,000 from around March 3, 2012 to October 7, 2014, the amount of gambling money of KRW 50,000,000,000,000,000 won.

B. Defendant and prosecutor’s argument of sentencing is to be determined.