All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s determination by the lower court is in itself unlawful, since the circumstances that were not included in the facts charged by the Defendants are considered as having been proven as fact, and the punishment was determined by reflecting the aforementioned facts.

B. In full view of the foregoing circumstances and other favorable circumstances in favor of the Defendants, the sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months and confiscation, Defendant B: Imprisonment with prison labor for one year and one year) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the reasoning of the lower judgment regarding the assertion of misapprehension of legal doctrine, it is recognized that the lower court mentioned the circumstances other than the facts charged in the instant case, which the Defendants led to the sentencing of the Defendants.

However, this is merely a statement about the tendency and attitude of the defendants to be investigated by investigation authorities after the arrest of them.

However, it is clear that Article 51 of the Criminal Act constitutes “the circumstances after the commission of a crime,” which should be considered in determining the punishment, and since the determination of the court below also conducted within the applicable scope of the punishment against the Defendants, the determination of the court of original judgment is in violation of the principle of no accusation and dismissal, and thus, cannot be deemed unlawful.

Therefore, this part of the argument is without merit.

B. As to the assertion on unfair sentencing, it is recognized that the defendants have divided their mistakes by submitting a number of rebuttals up to the trial. There are family members to support the assertion on unfair sentencing, and the opening period of the gambling site is not long.

However, the establishment and operation of illegal gambling sites, such as the crime of this case, are encouraging the gambling spirit of the general public and hindering the awareness of sound labor, and thus it is highly harmful to the society, so it is necessary to severely punish them. Defendant A is the general manager of the illegal gambling site, and Defendant B can properly operate Defendant A and its site.