Of the judgment of the court below, the part against Defendant A and the part against S in the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment of Defendant A (the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for one year, two years of suspended execution, confiscation, probation order, and second instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for ten months, and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. The punishment of the lower judgment by Defendant Q2 (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

C. The Prosecutor’s Second Instance sentence (Defendant A: imprisonment for 10 months, confiscation, Defendant S: Imprisonment for 10 months, probation period, 2 years of probation, community service order 200 hours, Defendant Q: imprisonment for 8 months) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. The grounds for appeal by Defendant A and the prosecutor’s judgment on the grounds for appeal against Defendant A were examined ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal against Defendant A, and the case of appeal against Defendant A was consolidated by the court below. Each of the crimes in the judgment of the court below by Defendant A are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and shall be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of a limited term of punishment, pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below by Defendant A cannot be maintained.

3. The prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing against Defendant S by Defendant S appears to be against his mistake, and the fact that Defendant S has no record of punishment for the same kind of crime is favorable to Defendant S.

However, in full view of the fact that the crime of this case is highly harmful to society by promoting speculation and impairing the people's sound sense of work, and the fact that Defendant S appears to have actually engaged in the game of this case in light of the degree of his involvement, the age, character and conduct, the environment of Defendant S, the circumstances and motive leading to the crime of this case, and all other matters concerning the sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case, it seems that the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable and unfair.

Therefore, the prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing against Defendant S is justified.

4. Prosecutor’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing on Defendant Q Q and Defendant Q Q.