Defendant

B All appeals by both the appeal and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B’s punishment (two years of suspended sentence for six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence against Defendant A (three years of suspended sentence in one year and six months of imprisonment) of the lower court is too unhutiled and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination as to Defendant B’s wrongful assertion of sentencing is favorable to Defendant B, on the following grounds: (a) Defendant B led to the instant crime; (b) was the first offender; and (c) was an employee upon the monthly salary from Defendant A; and (d) did not lead the said crime.

However, considering the fact that the Internet gambling is in need of strict punishment in light of the harm that may affect individuals and society, and other circumstances that are conditions for sentencing as shown in the pleadings, such as Defendant B’s age, sexual conduct, environment, background of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below on Defendant B is appropriate and is too unreasonable, and thus, Defendant B’s above assertion is without merit.

B. The Internet gambling site of the prosecutor’s judgment on the prosecutor’s wrongful assertion of sentencing is highly harmful to individuals and society by promoting excessive gambling spirit to the general public and impairing their sound sense of work. Defendant A also employed Defendant A’s employees, and operated the illegal Internet gambling site professionally and systematically for eight months. The period of operation is not shorter than eight months, and the amount deposited with the gambling amount is more than one billion won, and the amount is more than one billion won and the amount is considerable is disadvantageous to Defendant A.

However, considering the various circumstances that are conditions for sentencing as shown in the pleadings, such as the confession and reflect of the instant crime, the fact that Defendant A has no same criminal record, and the age, sex, environment, circumstances, circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the court below's sentence imposed on Defendant A cannot be deemed to be unfair because it is too uneasible and unfair. Thus, the prosecutor's assertion above is without merit.

3. Conclusion.