All parts of the judgment of the court below against Defendant E and G shall be reversed.

Defendant

E shall be sentenced to 10 months of imprisonment, Defendant G.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A, D, G, H, and B (Manopoly Undue Practices)'s respective sentences [one year and three months of imprisonment; two years of probation and probation; two years of probation and community service; 160 hours of imprisonment; 4 months of community service and probation; 80 hours of probation; 80 hours of probation and probation; 2 years of probation (the first instance judgment); 4 months of imprisonment and probation; 80 hours of probation; 1 year of probation and probation; 80 hours of probation; 80 hours of imprisonment and probation; 2 years of probation; 80 hours of probation; 80 hours of probation and probation; 2 years of probation and probation; 80 hours of social service] of the lower judgment are excessively unreasonable.

B. Defendant E (1) misunderstanding of facts (as to the opening of gambling place), Defendant E does not appear to have opened gambling in collusion with the head of gambling place to receive money lent to Defendant A. 2) The punishment of the lower court on the grounds of unfair sentencing (one hundred months of imprisonment) is excessively unreasonable.

C. AH and AJ does not punish Defendant F (legal scenario) more severe crimes, and indictment and punishment of only two to three persons different from Defendant F is not equal.

The first instance court's punishment for Defendant C (one year of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution, probation and community service 200 hours) and Defendant E (ten months of imprisonment) is unfair as it is excessively unhutiled.

2. We examine ex officio determination as to Defendant G ex officio, and Defendant G filed an appeal against both the judgment of the court of first and second instance, and the court of the court of the first and second instance decided to jointly examine the two appeals cases. The crimes of the court of the first and second instance against Defendant G are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and shall be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of the term of punishment aggravated for concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this respect, the parts of the judgment of the court of the court below against Defendant G in the first and second instances are all reversed.

3. Judgment on Defendant E

A. As to Defendant E’s assertion of mistake of facts, Defendant E also asserted to the same effect as the grounds for appeal under this part of this part of the judgment below, and the court below erred by U.R.