The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the Defendant was gambling “hulullar” at the time of the instant case.

A person, such as C, was seated in the same table with the above gambling, and there is no fact that he/she participated in the above gambling.

Even if so, the Defendant her gambling together with C, etc.

In light of the above, the judgment of the court below which convicted the crime of gambling is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and legal principles.

2. Before determining the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor ex officio, the prosecutor examined the reasons for appeal by the authority, and the prosecutor maintained the existing facts charged as the primary facts charged. In addition, the following facts charged are added to the facts charged, and “help and abetting gambling” is added to the name of the crime, and “Article 246(1), Articles 32, and 48(1) of the Criminal Act, and Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act” was added to “Article 246(1), Article 32, and Article 38(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act,” and the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is by permitting it.

However, despite the above reasons for reversal of authority, the defendant's misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to the primary facts charged are still subject to the judgment of this court.

3. Determination on the Defendant’s misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. On March 22, 2017, from around 19:50 to around 20:10 on March 22, 2017, the primary Defendant, along with C, D, E, and F, took part in the “H real estate” office located in Gyeonggi-si G by using 52 card, and took part in the same number 3, 3, and 3, and 3, a serial number of card if he/she acquired more than 3,000,000 won in total, five times in a way of setting the order of priority.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s partial legal statement, the witness C, D, E, and F’s legal statement, the protocol of seizure, the list of seizure, and on-site photographs.