The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Each sentence of the lower court against the Defendants (Defendant A: 1 and 6 months of probation, 2 years of probation, 240 hours of community service order, 18 million won of collection and confiscation, 2 years of probation, 120 hours of community service order, 120 hours of confiscation and confiscation in August, 2 years of probation, 2 years of probation, 2 years of probation of community service order and 80 hours of community service order in June, 300, 300 won of confiscation, Defendant C: 2 years of probation and 80

2. The operation of the private sports soil site requires strict punishment due to serious social harm, such as promoting the gambling spirit of the people and lowering the sound sense of labor, the operation of the site over a long-term period, the size of profits acquired therefrom, and the lease of a separate house for committing the crime. In particular, Defendant A led the instant crime to the domestic total market in relation to the operation of the private sports soil site, Defendant C was directly involved in the destruction of evidence by Defendant A after he was arrested as a flagrant offender, and the nature of the crime is not somewhat weak.

However, in full view of the following: (a) the Defendants did not repeat the crime of the same kind in relation to each of the instant crimes, and the Defendants did not have any record of committing the same crime; (b) the Defendants did not have any record of the suspension of qualification or more punishment in the case of Defendant B; (c) the Defendant C appears to have participated in the destruction of evidence upon the Defendant’s request by the Defendant A who had a long-standing relationship; and (d) other factors of sentencing as indicated in the instant pleadings, such as the circumstances leading up to each of the instant crimes, the circumstances after the commission of the Defendant A, the Defendants’ age, character and conduct environment, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too un

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit and it is in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.