The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal (three million won of a fine) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them. Although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to reverse the judgment of the first instance court solely on the ground that it is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court, and to refrain from imposing a sentence that does not differ

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The Defendant appears to be contrary to the recognition of the instant crime.

However, the crime of this case was committed by the Defendant, acting as a "total board" for the recruitment of members at the illegal sports gambling site, and aiding and abetting the operation of the above site. In light of the size of the business and the number of members actually recruited by the Defendant, etc., the crime related to the operation of the illegal gambling site is highly harmful to society, such as promoting the general public's spirit of gambling and impairing sound labor awareness, and thus hindering the operation of the illegal gambling site. There are no considerable amount of profits acquired by the Defendant from the crime of this case, there is no special change of circumstances to change the sentence of the lower court after the sentence of the lower court was sentenced, and there is no other changes of circumstances to change the Defendant's age, occupation, occupation, character and behavior, environment, criminal records, circumstances after the crime of this case, equality of sentencing with other accomplices, etc., the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.