All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (in case of Defendant A, 2 years of suspended execution, community service work 80 hours, confiscation, Defendant B: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months and 2 years of suspended execution, community service 40 hours) are 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 it in the appellate

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court did not find any new circumstances that make it possible for the lower court to change the sentence in the first instance court to have determined the sentence by taking account of various circumstances as indicated in its reasoning, including the confession of the Defendant, the number of persons participating in gambling and the frequency of gambling, the benefits acquired by the Defendant and the previous gambling; etc., the degree of assault against the Defendant B is not somewhat weak; and the Defendant is a confession and the first offender, etc., and the lower court does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, even if considering all sentencing factors indicated in the instant argument, including the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive and means of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., all of the sentencing factors indicated in the instant argument.

Therefore, the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendants’ appeal is without merit. Thus, all of the appeals are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.