All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, misunderstanding of the legal principles or misunderstanding 1) Defendants’ instant gambling act merely constitutes a temporary entertainment for eating skins, etc. among the actors, and there is no illegality.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby convicting the charges.

2) Defendant C did not have any pecuniary gain by opening gambling. Defendant C did not have any pecuniary gain.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged and thereby convicted.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the evidence duly adopted and completed the examination of evidence, the instant gambling act exceeded the level of temporary entertainment, taking into account the following: (a) the relationship between the Defendants, the time and place of gambling; (b) the time and place of gambling; (c) the number of cards kept at gambling hours; (d) the size and amount of the seized money; (d) the amount and source of the seized money; (e) Defendant B’s report details and statement at the time of reporting; and (e) Defendant A and B’s past records and records of gambling.

I seem to appear.

The Defendants’ assertion is not accepted.

2) According to the evidence duly adopted and completed the examination of evidence, in particular, the specific statement made by Defendant A’s investigative agency, the fact that Defendant C provided a certain amount of money and provided a soft card and table at a place where it is possible for Defendant C to gambling.

Defendant

C's assertion is not accepted.

B. There is no significant change in circumstances to consider the sentencing of the Defendants after the judgment of the court below on the unfair argument of sentencing.

Examining the various sentencing conditions shown in the records and changes of the instant case, the lower court’s sentence cannot be deemed unfair, even if considering all the circumstances alleged by the Defendants on the grounds of appeal.

There is also an unfair argument about the sentencing of the Defendants.