1. All parts of the judgment below against Defendant A, C, D, and H are reversed.

Defendant

A, C, and D shall be punished by imprisonment for each of 8 months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable as it is so far as each of the punishments imposed by the court below against the Defendants (Defendant A, C, and D: 4 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended execution, 2 million won of fine, 3 million won of fine, 3 million won of fine, 4 million won of fine, 4 million won of fine, 6 months of imprisonment, and 2 years of suspended execution) are too unfford.

2. The Defendants took part in the crime of this case under the condition that the Defendants receive KRW 2 million or KRW 2.5 million per month, and all the Defendants expressed their attitude to recognize and reflect their mistakes, and the Defendants did not have any criminal records exceeding the same kind of criminal records or fine.

However, in light of the fact that the crime of this case was committed by opening and operating an illegal gambling site office in a foreign country, the total amount of the gambling and refund is considerably large, the spirit of gambling for the public, the promotion of sound labor, and the failure of the family life, etc., which are serious social harm, and the Defendants were in charge of the operation and maintenance of the relevant gambling site, it is also necessary to punish the Defendants strictly.

On the other hand, examining the period of each of the Defendants’ participation, Defendant E, F, and G is merely about two weeks or one month in the case of Defendant E, F, and G, while Defendant A, C, and D are about four months or six months in the case of Defendant H, in particular, about nine months in the case of Defendant H.

Considering the above circumstances favorable or unfavorable to the Defendants, and the age, sex, environment, and all other conditions of sentencing as indicated in the instant pleadings, each of the punishments imposed by the lower court against Defendant A, C, D, and H is unreasonable, while each of the punishments imposed against Defendant E, F, and G is deemed unfair, it is difficult to view that the Defendants’ respective punishments imposed against Defendant E, F, and G are so unftened and unfair.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion against Defendant A, C, D, and H is well-grounded, while the prosecutor's above assertion against Defendant E, F, and G is without merit.

3. Conclusion, the prosecutor's defendant A and .