Defendant

All A and prosecutor appeals are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (an additional collection of KRW 1 year, confiscation, 135 million) is too unreasonable.

B. It is unreasonable that the sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below (Defendant A: imprisonment of one year, confiscation, 135 million won, additional collection of 135 million won, Defendant B, and imprisonment of two years of suspended execution, community service work 120 hours, Defendant C: imprisonment of eight months, two years of suspended execution, community service 160 hours, and confiscation) is too unfford.

2. Determination

A. We also examine the criminal defendant A and the prosecutor's each of the improper arguments in sentencing.

1) The lower court determined that: (a) the crime of this case was committed with serious social harm, such as encouraging the speculative spirit of the people and lowering the awareness of sound labor; (b) the Defendant committed the crime of this case for a long time from around 2013 to early 2015, which was committed by the Defendant; and in particular, immediately after the commission of the crime of this case around December 2014, it was inevitable to punish the Defendant, taking into account the fact that the Defendant opened another game room in the vicinity of the crackdown and continued the same kind of crime; (c) the Defendant appears to have led to the confession and reflect in depth of the crime of this case; and (d) the Defendant has no record of punishment exceeding the fine; and (d) was sentenced to a penalty of imprisonment for one year, confiscation, and collection of a penalty of KRW 135 million, as seen earlier, by taking account of favorable circumstances, including the fact that there was no record of punishment exceeding the fine.

2) In addition to the circumstances indicated by the lower court prior to the deliberation of the political party, all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, family relation, the family’s economic situation to support, sexual conduct, motive and background of the crime, relationship with the victim, and circumstances after the crime. Considering the various sentencing circumstances asserted by the Defendant, the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court sentencing committee shall apply the sentencing guidelines to the crime No. 1 (exchange of results obtained through game water) within the scope of the recommended punishment / [the scope of recommended punishment] the provision for the use of illegal game water.