All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

The main points of the grounds for appeal are as follows. The defendant asserts that the punishment of the court below (one year of imprisonment, one-year surcharge 9,505,634 won) is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor asserts that the punishment of the court below is too unfied and unreasonable.

Judgment

In full view of each of the crimes of this case, the promotion of a speculative spirit, the harm to the sound sense of labor is serious, the Defendant’s transfer of the place, and operated four or more months, and the size of gambling funds was small, the Defendant pretended to receive the means of access to the crime, and the Defendant’s criminal proceeds are against the Defendant’s mistake, and there is no other criminal power except once a fine is imposed due to assault, and all of the favorable circumstances, such as the Defendant’s family situation, and all of the sentencing conditions in the instant argument, it is not recognized that the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable.

3. Correction of the original judgment

1. Articles 30(2)1 and 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, etc. under the relevant provisions on criminal facts (the fact that a speculative business was conducted without permission, and the crime of paragraph (1) of the same Article is added to Article 30 of the Criminal Act); Articles 34(3)2 and 6(1) of the Lottery Tickets and Lottery Fund Act (the fact that a person sells online lottery tickets without entering into a contract with a lottery business entity; the crime of paragraph (1) of the same Article is added to Article 30 of the Criminal Act); Article 247 of the Criminal Act (the fact that a gambling space is opened; the crime of paragraph (1) of the same Article is added to Article 30 of the Criminal Act); Articles 49(4)1 and 6(3)1 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act (the fact that a person takes over a medium), the means of access, the transfer of means of access, and the act of taking over several means of access, as in this case, constitutes several crimes under the Electronic Financial Transactions Act.