The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment of one year and two months.

Defendant .

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B’s punishment (a year and six months of imprisonment, additional collection) is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (as to the Defendants) of the lower court’s sentence (as to the Defendant A: imprisonment of 10 months, two years of probation, observation of protection, community service, lecture order, additional collection, Defendant B’s imprisonment with prison labor, one year and six months, additional collection) is deemed to be too uneasy and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In comparison with the judgment of the court below on the prosecutor's improper assertion of sentencing against Defendant A, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing at the court below, and the sentencing of the court below exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

In addition, considering the Defendant’s age, gender and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court cannot be deemed to be unfair because it is too uneasible and unreasonable.

B. The instant crime committed with respect to Defendant B’s unfair judgment on the grounds that the Defendant operated the illegal sports soil site led with F and E, thereby pretending to obtain criminal proceeds, etc., which are punished by it, the nature of the crime is bad, and such crime is likely to be socially harmful to the society.

However, all of the crimes of this case are recognized by the defendant, and there is no record of criminal punishment except for those sentenced once to a fine due to gambling.

In addition, the prosecutor's opinion that the defendant actively cooperates with the investigation agency was submitted to the trial.

In full view of all the circumstances, including such circumstances as above, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, circumstances after the commission of the crime, and circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the Defendant’s improper assertion of sentencing is justified, and the Prosecutor’s improper assertion of sentencing is dismissed, as the Defendant’s punishment of 1 and 6 months sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable, since it is deemed that the Defendant’s punishment of 1 and 6 months was too unreasonable.

3. Conclusion.