All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s imprisonment (eight months of imprisonment) against Defendant A (unfairly unfair) is too unreasonable.

B. Although Defendant C (in fact-finding and inappropriate sentencing) is merely a mere employee of G Gameland, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment by finding the Defendant to have committed the instant crime by taking charge of entry and exchange of books as the head of business division. The court below's punishment (5 million won of fine) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly examined and adopted by the lower court regarding Defendant C’s assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant may recognize the fact that the Defendant was a co-principal of the G Gameland B, who was the head of the management department of the G Gameland, and was sitting in the account book, exchanged the account book, and supervised outside of the game room on the CCTV screen. Even if the Defendant was a mere employee other than the head of the business of the above game room, it does not interfere with the recognition of the Defendant as a co-principal of the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, etc. due to the business of the Defendant in light of

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is not accepted.

B. Defendant A concurrently operated two game resorts, including G Gameland and L, and continued to operate the game room even after the control over G Gameland. Even before the instant crime was committed, even before the instant crime was committed, Defendant A operated the Y Game room and was under investigation by an investigative agency on August 8, 2013. While performing the leading role of the instant crime, Defendant A instigated an offender to himself/herself on the ground of the so-called “bathy president” while performing the leading role of the instant crime; Defendant C did not have the same criminal history; Defendant C did not have the same criminal history.