Of the judgment below of the court below No. 1 and 3, the part against Defendant A and the judgment of the court below No. 2 shall be reversed

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1 (the fact that the Defendant was prepared to run a game room business on July 18, 2014) and did not provide a game to unspecified customers. The Defendant was prepared to run a game room business on July 18, 2014.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous and erroneous.

2) The sentencing of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (the first instance court: the imprisonment of one year and two months, and the second instance court: the imprisonment of ten months, and the third instance court: the imprisonment of two months) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentencing of Defendant I (two years of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

(c)

The lower court’s sentencing (as above, Defendant A, I: the same as above, Defendant BU: Imprisonment with labor for two months) against the Defendants of the public prosecutor is too uneasy and unreasonable.

2. Determination ex officio on Defendant A

A. The judgment of the court below in the first, second, and third cases against Defendant A was rendered, and the court decided to hold a joint hearing with this case. Each crime of the first, second, and third cases in the judgment of the court in the first, second, and third cases is one of the concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one of the crimes must be sentenced pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act.

Defendant

The judgment of the court below 1, 2, and 3 against A cannot be maintained as it is, and all of them must be reversed.

B. However, despite the existence of the above reasons for reversal ex officio, Defendant A’s assertion of mistake as to the judgment of the court of first instance is still subject to the judgment of the court of this Court, which will be examined below.

3. Determination as to Defendant A’s assertion of mistake of facts

A. The defendant's confession at the investigative agency and at the court of first instance, at the court of first instance, differs from the subsequent statement at the court of first instance or the appellate trial, and the admissibility or credibility of the confession is doubtful.

In determining the credibility of a confession, the statement itself is objectively reasonable, and what is the motive or reason for the confession.