1. The part of the judgment of the court below regarding Defendant B shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

except that this judgment.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable because the sentence of the lower court (the imprisonment of eight months for the defendant A, the imprisonment of six months for the defendant B, and the confiscation) is too large.

2. The crime of this case against Defendant B’s reasons for appeal is that the Defendant operates a game room jointly with Defendant A, etc. for the purpose of exchanging the result of the game. As such, the operation of an illegal game room is highly harmful to society, such as promoting a general public’s spirit of gambling and undermining work desire, so it is necessary to strictize it. The game room of this case where the Defendant carried on money exchange business is equipped with a 74 game machine, and its size is small and its operation period is not short and its operation period is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, in full view of the following: (a) the Defendant’s exclusion from the record of juvenile protection disposition, the first offender, and the recognition of the instant crime; (b) the Defendant’s gains acquired by the instant crime are relatively large; (c) the degree of the Defendant’s participation in the instant crime is relatively minor; (d) other various circumstances, such as the motive, background, means and consequence of the instant crime; and (e) the conditions for sentencing specified in the records and arguments, including the circumstances after the instant crime; and (e) the outcome of the application of the sentencing guidelines by the Sentencing Committee,

Therefore, Defendant B’s above assertion is justified.

3. The fact that Defendant A’s judgment on the grounds for appeal did not have any record of punishment except for the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act and recognized the crime of this case is favorable to the Defendant.

However, the crime of this case is led by the defendant and operated the game room jointly with the defendant B, and it is a business of exchanging the result of the game.

The operation of such illegal game centers is highly harmful to society, such as encouraging the gambling spirit of the general public and undermining their will to work.