All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (Defendant B: Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, fines for a fine of 20 million won, Defendant C: imprisonment with prison labor for a period of ten months and fines of 10 million won) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The rationale behind the judgment is that the Defendants recognized the crime and reflected, the Defendants’ health status is not good, the Defendants have dependents to the Defendants, and Defendant C had no record of criminal punishment other than the two-time fine for drinking driving prior to the instant crime.

However, the crime of this case committed by the Defendants in collusion with A, operating a similar gambling office, and transferred dividends after receiving approximately KRW 700 million from October 1, 2014 to May 31, 2015. As such, the crime of this case is likely to cause serious social harm, such as promoting an excessive speculative spirit, impairing the awareness of sound labor, thereby causing the failure of the general public’s economic and family life, and thus, it is necessary to strictly punish the participants in the crime.

In addition, Defendant B was detained on August 14, 2014 due to the same kind of crime that was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, and thus, was aware of the seriousness of the crime. On October 1, 2014 due to real name risk, etc., Defendant C committed the instant crime until he/she was detained in court, even though he/she was released on bail on October 1, 2014 and should be more weighted. Defendant C also committed the instant crime without being aware of the same crime that was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a period of the same kind of crime that was sentenced to four months.

The above favorable circumstances have been sufficiently reflected in the sentencing of the lower court.

Considering the fact that the court below appears to have been sentenced simultaneously with the crime for which judgment became final and conclusive, taking into account the Defendants’ age, gender, family environment, motive and background of the crime, the means and consequence of the crime, and various sentencing conditions as shown in the arguments in this case, such as the circumstances before and after the crime, the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.