All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that each sentence of the court below against the defendants (the defendant A: the defendant) (the six months of imprisonment with prison labor for each of the crimes of paragraphs (a) and (b) as stated in the judgment below and the crimes of Article 2 as stated in the judgment of the court below is too unreasonable.

2. If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the court below, and the sentencing of the court below does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined the sentence against the Defendant by comprehensively taking into account the favorable circumstances and unfavorable conditions to the Defendants.

In addition, there is no new change in circumstances that can change the above punishment of the court below in the trial.

Defendant

A not only has the record of being punished for a crime of opening gambling places, but also has committed the second crime of Article 2 of the decision of the court below in the same kind of narcotics crime during the period of repeated crime due to narcotics crime.

Defendant

B committed each of the crimes in this case during the period of parole.

In addition, taking into account the circumstances cited by the Defendants as the grounds for appeal, even if the circumstances cited by the Defendants as the grounds for appeal are considered, it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s punishment against the Defendants is too unreasonable beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, by comprehensively taking into account the character, conduct, environment, motive, means, and consequence of the Defendants’ criminal conduct, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime.

3. In conclusion, the defendants' appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since the defendants' appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

However, pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, the term "the corresponding provision of the Act on 1. Criminal Crimes" in the judgment of the court below is added to "the choice of a person who commits a crime", and "1. Aggravation of repeated crime" and "1. Aggravation of concurrent Crimes" are added to "the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.