All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment for one year and four months, and additional collection of 1290,000 won, confiscation, and collection of 1.29 billion won, confiscation, and collection of 5,8120,000 won, confiscation and collection of 1 year and two months,8120,000 won, confiscation, and Defendant C: imprisonment for one year and additional collection of 2,340,00 won) are excessively unreasonable.

2. The determination of sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, with a discretionary determination that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, based on which our Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness, has a unique area of the first instance trial regarding the

In addition, considering these circumstances and the ex post facto nature of the appellate court, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions in the event that there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, and to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court on the sole ground that the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, even though the sentence of the first instance court is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court,

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The lower court rendered the aforementioned sentence to the Defendants on the grounds of sentencing as indicated in its reasoning. The Defendants led to the confession and reflect of the crime, and Defendant C voluntarily cooperated in the investigation by attending the investigation agency, and the Defendants did not have any particular criminal record, etc., the circumstances favorable to the sentencing alleged in the trial are already considered in the lower court’s determination of the punishment, and the Defendants’ involvement in the operation of the illegal gambling site with a large amount of social harm and injury, etc. are not good, and the degree of the Defendants’ participation cannot be deemed minor, and committed a systematic and intelligent crime by sharing their roles together with many accomplices, and the period during which they participated in the crime exceeds one year.