The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and two months.

evidence of seizure.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The respective sentences of the defendant A and B (the defendant A: imprisonment of one and half years and confiscation, the imprisonment of six months and confiscation) of the court below are too unreasonable.

B. Each sentence of the lower court against the Defendants by the public prosecutor (one year and six months of imprisonment, confiscation and confiscation; six months of imprisonment and confiscation; Defendant C: imprisonment with prison labor for six months; imprisonment for two years of suspended execution and confiscation; Defendant E; imprisonment with prison labor for six years of suspended execution and six months of suspended execution and two years of suspended execution) is too uneasy and unfair.

2. The crime of this case with respect to Defendant A caused serious social harm, such as encouraging the general public to commit an excessive speculative spirit, impairing the awareness of sound labor, thereby causing failure of the economy and home life of the general public, thereby causing severe punishment to the participants in the crime. In particular, Defendant A operated the illegal game room in two places on the ground of the so-called “bol president,” Defendant A participated in the operation of his/her spouse, club, and others, even though he/she was under control during his/her business, and continued to operate his/her business on the ground of another person, etc., in light of the circumstances of the crime, it is acknowledged that there is a need to punish Defendant A with severe punishment, and a sentence of punishment is inevitable.

On the other hand, in full view of the following factors: Defendant A’s attempt to commit the instant crime and his mistake is divided; there is no record of being sentenced to a fine exceeding the fine; Defendant A’s period of crime by business establishment is not long; Defendant A’s age and happiness environment; circumstances before and after the instant crime; and various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments, the lower court’s punishment against Defendant A is somewhat unreasonable.

3. Defendant B’s judgment as to the instant crime was the time of the instant crime and the mistake was divided, and the instant part of the crime was committed on May 5, 201, and was in violation of the Game Industry Promotion Act which became final and conclusive on May 5, 201.