All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for one year, three years of suspended execution, and community service order 160 hours, Defendant B: imprisonment with prison labor for ten months, three years of suspended execution, and 160 hours of community service order) of the court below is too unreasonable.

2. As to the determination of sentencing, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court in the event that the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, since the first instance court’s inherent area exists in the determination of sentencing.

(대법원 2015. 7. 23. 선고 2015도3260 전원합의체 판결 참조). 원심이 양형이유로 든 사정들(사행성 게임장에 대한 엄벌의 필요성, 피고인 A은 동종 범죄로 처벌받은 전력이 없고, 피고인 B은 2017. 11. 17. 같은 범죄로 징역 10월, 집행유예 2년의 판결을 받고 그 판결이 2017. 11. 25. 확정되었으므로 그 사건과 동시에 재판받을 경우와의 형평을 고려해야 하는 점 등)을 비롯하여, 이 사건 기록과 변론에 나타난 모든 양형조건 ㉠ 범행을 자백한 점, ㉡ 피고인 A은 벌금형을 초과하는 전과가 없는 점, ㉢ 피고인들은 남매 관계로 오빠인 피고인 A이 게임장의 주된 운영자였던 것으로 보이는 점, ㉣ 피고인 B에 대한 위 확정판결의 범행은 2017. 8. 25.경부터

9. The game room with a size of 330 square meters up to 17:00 square meters is installed in a game room with a size of 330 square meters and exchanged cash; the game room is a place different from the game room in this case; and on the other hand, from July 10, 2017, the game room is a place different from the game room in this case.

8.5. From around 09:45, up to 29:13m2 to 206.13m2, the Defendants committed an act of setting up a game machine and exchanging cash. In full view of the circumstances in which the Defendants were in charge of each of the offenses, including the role of the Defendants and the degree of punishment among the Defendants, etc., the circumstances in which the Defendants were in charge of the offenses are in the grounds for appeal (the fact that the Defendants run the business using the permitted game machine, the profits actually earned,