A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant A (one year of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B of erroneous determination of facts as to Defendant B 1

B. (1) to (3) is not involved in any crime violating the Electronic Financial Transactions Act.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts.

2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on Defendant B of unreasonable sentencing (ten months of imprisonment and confiscation are too unlimited and unfair).

2. Determination

A. As to Defendant B’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts, the conspiracy does not require any legal punishment, but is a combination of two or more persons to jointly process and realize a crime. Although there is no process of the whole conspiracy, if there is a combination of intent to realize a crime through the joint processing of the crime, the conspiracy relationship is established in order or impliedly and through several persons, even if there is no process of the whole conspiracy, and as long as such conspiracy has been conducted, even if there is no direct participation in the conduct, the person is held liable for the other accomplices’ act as a joint principal (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Do1706, Sept. 12, 1997). 2) The following facts are acknowledged according to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below.

A) Defendant B, along with Defendant A, operated the Internet sports gambling site from April 2016 to June 8, 2016. (B) Defendant B took charge of charging and exchange business in connection with the operation of the said gambling site. For this purpose, the so-called “Soverbbook” was necessarily required.

C) Accordingly, Defendant B performed the filling and exchange work using the presidential passbook, cash cards connected thereto, authorized certificates, etc. Defendant B around May 2016, with the instructions of Defendant A around May 2016.