All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal that the court below sentenced the Defendants to each punishment (the imprisonment of two and half years, Defendant B, C, and D: Imprisonment of one and half years, and one year and six months, and Defendant E: the first sentence of the court below's decision

(a) 2), 1-

B. 3) - As to the offence, 10 months of imprisonment, 2-A of the ruling - 6 months of suspended sentence of imprisonment - 2 years of suspended sentence of 6 months, 1 year of imprisonment, 1 year of imprisonment, 8 months of imprisonment, 8 months of each forfeiture) are too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. It is recognized that Defendant A confessions all of the instant crimes and repents in depth.

However, the Defendant was punished several times for the same type of crime, including the crime of opening gambling and gambling places. In particular, on October 8, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year and ten months for the crime of opening gambling places on March 26, 2017, completed the term of imprisonment on March 26, 2017, and re-off the crime of this case during the repeated crime period. In light of the fact that the Defendant committed the crime of this case, there is no doubt in light of the fact that: (a) the Defendant planned and managed it in a systematic manner in opening and operating gambling places; (b) there is a need to be severe punishment when considering the social harm of gambling; (c) there is no new change in circumstances that may be considered in sentencing after the judgment of the court below; and (d) examining the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, scale and frequency of the crime of opening the gambling place of this case; and (d) profits earned by the Defendant, the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed to be too unfair by examining.

B. Although Defendant B is recognized that all of the instant crimes were led to confession and reflect, and that Defendant’s children’s disability needs to be protected, the Defendant was fined several times as a crime of gambling, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of ten months as a crime of opening gambling on August 13, 2015, despite being sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years as a crime of opening gambling on August 13, 2015, there is no possibility of edification at the time of the instant crime, and there is no new change of circumstances that may be considered for sentencing after the lower judgment.