Defendant

C Each of the defendants B shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,00,000,00, in four months of imprisonment.

Defendant

B The above fine.

Punishment of the crime

1. From May 14, 2018 to May 17:30, 2018, Defendant A’s gambling opening house located in Daejeon Dong-gu, Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-dong from May 14, 2018 to around 17:30 of the same day, Defendant: (a) provided that, under the name of the sale of the daily life, the Defendant provided an explanation for the method of gambling a person by communicating with the people under the pretext of the sale of the daily life, and (b) provided a gambling house for the purpose of profit-making.

2. Defendant B’s gambling at the time and place specified in paragraph (1) 1: (a) betting a board of at least KRW 1,000 each on one side of the 6 boxes, using the 45 luculations on the floor; and (b) betting a board of at least KRW 1,000 on one side; and (c) gambling a 'breging’ in a way that the highest place of agreement on the 3 luculations was reached.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each protocol on the examination of the suspect of the Defendants, D, F, each G, H, I, J, K, L, M, and N;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. In full view of the following circumstances: the inspection report of the instant gambling case, the investigation report (gambling, etc.), the 112 Report Report List, the field photo [Defendant B’s defense counsel asserted that the instant gambling does not constitute a crime merely because it was a temporary entertainment, but the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, and the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence, namely, the developments leading up to the detection of the instant gambling, the form of the instant gambling site at the time of detection, the place where the instant gambling was conducted, the developments leading up to the instant gambling, the relationship between the participants of the instant gambling, and the criminal records, it is difficult to view that the instant gambling conducted by Defendant B was merely a temporary entertainment. Accordingly, the above assertion by Defendant B’s defense counsel cannot be accepted).

1. Article 247 of the Criminal Act; Article 247 of the Criminal Act; Article 246(1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 70 (1) and Article 69 (2) of the Criminal Act in the custody of a workhouse (Defendant B);

1. Suspension of execution (Defendant C) Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act