All of the appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

The gist of the Prosecutor’s appeal is that the Defendants, while gambling beyond the level of temporary entertainment at the time of the instant case or setting up a gambling place for profit, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

However, in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the records of this case, namely, Defendant A, C, D, and E, who were aware of Defendant B’s reputation, were engaged in the gambling of this case at the time of this case, and was engaged in the gambling of this case at the time of Defendant B’s house; Defendant A, C, D, and E, a total of KRW 3,000 won per each time from other participants; and as a result of the gambling of this case, all participants do not exceed KRW 10,000 each, the gambling of this case constitutes a case where the degree of temporary recreation of Defendant A, C, D, and E is limited to a case where the amount of money that all participants followed or lost does not exceed KRW 10,00.

In addition, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize that Defendant B opened a gambling place for the purpose of obtaining property benefits in return for providing the rest of the Defendants with a gambling place to the rest of the Defendants, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this differently.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above argument is without merit, and all of the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.