The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

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

except that this judgment.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence of the lower court (10 months of imprisonment with prison labor, 8 months of imprisonment with prison labor, 1 year of imprisonment with prison labor, and 39 million won of additional collection) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records on the assertion of unfair sentencing by Defendant A and Defendant C, the lower court, based on the following factors: (a) there are significant social harm caused by the operation of illegal gambling sites; (b) the period of operation is very long; (c) the record of punishment as a crime of the same kind in the case of Defendant C is several times; (d) the records of punishment as a crime of the same kind in the case of Defendant C are divided and reflected; (e) the Defendant was the initial offender in the case of Defendant A; (e) cooperation with the investigation; and (g) the motive, degree of participation, and role in the crime; and (e) there is no particular change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s judgment; and (e) considering the various reasons of sentencing revealed during the oral proceedings, the lower court’s sentencing is too large to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3) Therefore, the argument of unfair sentencing is without merit. (B) The argument of unfair sentencing on Defendant B’s assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit. (1) The fact that there is a significant social harm caused by the operation of illegal gambling sites, and the fact that the nature of the crime is bad in light of the criminal history and the method

However, the sentencing of the court below is too unreasonable in light of all the circumstances revealed in the process of pleadings and records, such as the fact that the errors are divided and contradictory to each other, the operation period of the illegal gambling site is relatively short, the primary offender is the first offender, the cooperation in the investigation, and the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive leading to committing the crime, degree of participation and role, and circumstances after committing the crime.

2. Therefore, the argument on unreasonable sentencing is justified.

3. In conclusion, the appeal by Defendant B is reasonable, and the judgment of the court below is in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.