Defendant

All appeals filed by A and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentencing of Defendant A is too inappropriate.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, Defendant B, as the manager of the building, could fully recognize the fact that Defendant A, E, and F (hereinafter “F”) had F et al. use the building and aids and abets the use of the building, but the lower court acquitted Defendant B of this part of the facts charged. Thus, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts.

2. Determination

A. It is recognized that Defendant A’s judgment on the unjust argument of sentencing by Defendant A is divided into his mistake.

However, considering the fact that the nature of the instant crime is not good, the period and scale of the instant crime, and the age of Defendant A, sexual conduct and environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable, and thus, Defendant A’s above assertion is not reasonable.

B. On April 20, 2015, Defendant B, who is a manager of the “H Gameland” building located in G in Sinpo City, and Defendant B, despite being aware that F, etc. obtained through the use of game water as a result of the use of the game water, intended to operate the illegal speculative game site by using the said building to F, etc. for the purpose of enabling F, etc. to use the said building for the aforementioned crime by facilitating F, etc.

2) The lower court’s judgment comprehensively based on the adopted evidence, i.e., the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court, i.e., ① did not state that the Defendant B would engage in money exchange activities other than operating the game room at the time when the building was leased from the Defendant B, and it appears that the Defendant B did not talk about money exchange activities even thereafter, and ② the above game room is F, etc.