All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants and appeals filed by the Defendants A, B, C, and D are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) Considering the fact that the frequency of gambling in this case’s gambling room is more than 100 times and the size of the gambling money is more than 35 million won, eight gambling visitors, who had been able to have been involved in gambling, attempted to gambling habitually by the Defendant at the request of B who host the instant gambling room, and agreed to receive the price from B, the Defendant played a role of changing the heart from the gambling room, and the Defendant would receive the price from the gambling room. In light of the fact that the degree of participating in the crime of gambling is not less than that of gambling, such as the fact that the number of gambling in this case’s gambling room is less than 100 times and the amount of gambling money is less than 35 million won, the Defendant’s gambling visitors who had been able to have been engaged in gambling, and the Defendant played his habitual gambling in this case’s gambling room at the request of B who host the instant gambling box, and the degree of participating in the crime of gambling.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant not to be habitually recognized as habitual gambling assistance is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles which affected the conclusion of the judgment, which found the defendant guilty only of gambling assistance.

(2) The sentence of the lower court’s unreasonable sentencing on the Defendants (six months of imprisonment, confiscation, confiscation, Defendant B: imprisonment of eight months, confiscation, Defendant C: imprisonment of six months, probation period of two years, probation period of two years, probation period of two years, community service work, confiscation, confiscation, and Defendant E: fine of 120 hours, confiscation, confiscation: 6 months, probation period of two years, probation period of two years, probation period of 80 hours, confiscation, Defendant F: imprisonment of six months, probation period of two years, probation period of two years, community service, 80 hours, confiscation) is deemed to be too unreasonable.

B. Defendant A (1) In misapprehension of the legal principle, Defendant A (1) went to X hotel to receive money, and the act of gambling was only one time, and the Defendant did not have any habit of gambling, and thus, the habitual nature of gambling is not recognized.

Nevertheless, the court below which found the defendant guilty of habitual gambling aiding and abetting the crime of gambling is the crime of gambling.