The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

, however, the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Legal principles are not applied to the misunderstanding Defendants on the ground that there is no habit of gambling, and thus, the crime of gambling is not established habitually against the Defendants.

B. It is unfair that all of the first deliberation punishments (one year of imprisonment with prison labor, six months of suspended execution, one year of suspended execution) against the illegal defendants are too unreasonable.

2. According to the ex officio judgment records with respect to Defendant A, the Defendant was sentenced to the suspension of execution of three years and six months, a community service order and additional collection of at least 200 hours on January 29, 201 and the fact that the instant crime was committed before the said judgment becomes final and conclusive.

As above, all of the crimes for which judgment became final and the crimes of this case are concurrent crimes in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and in accordance with the first sentence of Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act, a sentence shall be imposed on the crimes of this case in the first instance judgment taking into account equity and equity. Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is unable to be maintained as it is.

However, regardless of the above reasons for ex officio reversal, Defendant A’s assertion of misunderstanding the legal principles still is subject to the judgment of this court, and thus, we will look at the changes in this provision.

3. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. In determining the Defendants’ assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles, habitual gambling refers to the nature of the actor as a habit of repeated gambling. In determining the existence of such habition, criminal records of gambling, frequency of gambling, etc. are important data to determine the existence of such habition, but even if not, in light of the nature and method of gambling, the size of gambling, and the patterns of gambling participating in gambling, if the habition of gambling is recognized, it is inevitable to recognize habitual gambling (see Supreme Court Decision 95Do955 delivered on July 11, 1995).