The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10 million.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of all the circumstances, such as the fact that the Defendant (unfairly unfair) is against the Defendant, the punishment imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court acquitted the Defendant of the remainder of gambling except for those of gambling around March 2012, on the following grounds: (a) there was G’s statement that the Defendant, among the facts charged in the instant case, led the Defendant to a confession from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court; and (b) around March 2012, each gambling which constitutes concurrent crimes, committed gambling with the Defendant; and (c) even if the status of individual gambling as to the Defendant’s entry into and departure from the Republic of Korea can be reinforced evidence, all of which are found guilty, the lower court acquitted the Defendant. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant and the prosecutor. Of the facts charged in the instant case, gambling at around March 2012, the Defendant 2012 at the “F” casino located outside the Philippines on March 2012. Thus, although the legal provisions applicable to the facts charged in the instant case are “Article 246(1) of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 11731, Apr. 5, 2013), the lower court erred by applying Article 246(1) of the current Criminal Act, which is the current law, so the lower court is no longer able to maintain the lower judgment in this regard.

However, the prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal.

3. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake or misapprehension of legal principle

A. The facts charged in this part of the facts charged (not guilty part) is that the Defendant gambled three times from April 2, 2012 to July 2, 2012, as indicated in [Attachment 2, 3, and 4] list of crimes (3) in the “F Casino,” located in the Republic of the Philippines, outside of the Republic of Korea.