The judgment below

Of the defendants A, the part of the defendant is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year and four months.

Defendant

A 229.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair form of punishment) of the court below's punishment (the defendant A; the defendant A; the penalty of 229,275,000 won, the penalty of 229,275,000 won; the defendant B; the imprisonment of 1 year and 6 months; the penalty of 750,000,000 won) is unafford, and the prosecutor is each unjust.

Judgment

Defendant

A. The Defendant reflects the Defendant, and there is no particular criminal power except for the Defendant who was sentenced to suspended sentence on the grounds that it was sentenced to suspended sentence in 195. The instant crime needs to be strictly punished for its social harm, such as promoting a speculative spirit of the general public, failure in home economy, etc. The period of operation of the instant site reaches three years and six months, and the settlement of accounts on December 4, 2012. According to the settlement of accounts, the amount charged is deemed to have earned a total of KRW 6.3.6 billion, and the exchange amount is equivalent to KRW 6.3.6 billion, which is the sum of KRW 6.3.6 billion, and the additional criminal proceeds are deemed to have been generated thereafter. The Defendant was involved from the beginning of the instant crime, taking into account the fact that the Defendant took an important role as an intermediary manager, and the amount of punishment and equity (this case’s sentencing against the Defendant is too unfair.) with respect to other accomplices who participated in the instant crime.

Defendant

B It is against the defendant, there is no previous difference between the defendant and the defendant's investment in money on the illegal gambling site of this case, and it is not directly involved in the operation thereof, but there is a favorable circumstance that the defendant seems to require medical treatment by means of a certificate of Macccul Macul.

However, since the operation of the instant illegal gambling site was conducted for a long time, and the amount of the commission of the instant crime was significant, the Defendant used only KRW 420 million out of the amount of KRW 750 million acquired in the course of operating the instant illegal gambling site, and the remainder of KRW 330 million re-investment in G’s request. Therefore, only the amount equivalent to KRW 420 million actually used by the Defendant should be collected.