A. Since the Defendant conspireds with the Defendant A to operate the game of this case, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in erroneous determination of facts.

B. Each sentence of the lower judgment (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for 8 months, Defendant B: fine of 5,00,000) against the Defendants is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts (Defendant B), and evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the defendant A, an accomplice, operated the game of this case with the defendant, and the management of the game of this case was in charge of the defendant. ② The defendant A, the president of the game of this case, even though the defendant A, the president of the game of this case, requested the machinery of this case by ordering the defendant to purchase machinery, and the defendant himself stated that he received daily allowances from the defendant. Since each of the above statements is not consistent and there are no circumstances to suspect the credibility thereof, each of the above statements is sufficient to recognize the fact that the defendant operated the game of this case jointly with the defendant A, and therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. In full view of all the facts pertaining to the period of the instant crime and its profits, the Defendants’ age, occupation, and all other matters pertaining to the sentencing specified in the records and arguments, the lower judgment’s respective punishment against the Defendants is deemed appropriate, and thus, the Defendants’ assertion is without merit, since the Defendants’ assertion is without merit, in full view of the following: (a) the period of the instant crime and its profits therefrom; and (b) the period of the instant crime; and (c) the Defendants’ benefits therefrom; and (d) the period of the instant crime and all other matters pertaining to the sentencing specified in the records and arguments of the instant case.

3. According to the conclusion, the Defendants’ appeal is without merit, and all appeals are made in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.