1. Defendant C’s appeal is dismissed.

2. The part of the judgment of the court below against the Defendants F and G.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that each sentence of the court below (for defendant C, 8 months of imprisonment, 6-15 days of perjury, 6-15 confiscation, 6-5 months of imprisonment, 1-5 months of confiscation, 6 months of imprisonment, 1-5 months of capital increase, 1-5 confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Although Defendant C’s mistake is recognized, the Defendant committed the instant crime even though he was sentenced to a fine of KRW 3 million in 2007 for the same crime, and one year of suspension of execution in June 201 for the same crime, and the degree of his participation is not easy, taking into account all the factors such as the Defendant’s age, character, occupation and environment, motive and circumstance leading to the instant crime, circumstance after the instant crime, etc., and the sentencing conditions as indicated in the instant records and arguments, such as the fact that the Defendant’s punishment is too too unreasonable, and the Defendant’s assertion is not reasonable.

B. The Defendant F committed the instant crime even though he had been sentenced to the two-year suspended sentence for six months of imprisonment for the same kind of crime in 2008, is disadvantageous to the Defendant F.

However, in light of the favorable circumstances, such as the Defendant’s mistake, and the fact that the Defendant involved in the operation of V Gameland upon the Defendant’s request, and the degree of participation in the solicitation is not much severe, etc., the lower court’s punishment is somewhat unreasonable, since it is recognized that the Defendant’s punishment is somewhat unreasonable, in view of all the sentencing conditions specified in the instant records and arguments, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, occupation and environment, motive and circumstance leading to the instant crime, and circumstances after the instant crime, etc.

C. Prior to the judgment on Defendant G Defendant G’s grounds for appeal, the record reveals that the Defendant was examined ex officio from the Gwangju District Court’s Netcheon Branch on May 3, 2013.