beta
Text
All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles) Defendant A and B’s act of pro-stop cannot be deemed as merely a temporary entertainment, but the lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged on the ground that it was not illegal on the ground that it was merely a temporary entertainment level. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles or misapprehending the legal principles.
2. Determination
A. The summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: Defendant A and B’s gambling Defendant A and B together with H and I, from around 14:00 on October 14, 2015 to around 14:20 on the same day, the one who first pays three points using the 51 head of Goyang-gu EF food in Goyangyang-gu, Goyang-gu from around 14:20 on May 2015, and the other person paid 100 won in addition to the 100 won each time when adding 100 won to the her 3rd person. The other person saw her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her
2) Defendant C’s gambling aiding and abetting Defendant C provided four persons, such as H, at the time, at the place, and place, with the knowledge of the fact that he gambling was carried out as above, with a view to aiding and abetting the gambling, the aforementioned “F food store” place and the scambling, etc. to facilitate his gambling.
B. The lower court determined as follows: (a) Defendant A, B, etc. took advantage of the following circumstances into consideration: (i) Defendant A, etc.: (i) the person who takes advantage of the money that the person takes in drinking with the mother and child; (ii) the person takes a stop at a restaurant easily accessible to the general public; (iii) the person stop the stop at a low level; and (iv) the person’s stop was at a time before and after the average fire and the delivery (except for KRW 20,000,000,000 per capita when he borrowed from Defendant C), and (iv) the person who takes 100 won for each 10 point and takes 3 points first; and (iii) the amount of the stop for each stop was not considered to be the large amount; and (v) Defendant A, B, etc., with the inside part of the stop, shared or divided the stop.