Responding to syllogism: judgment for sin requires being under the law

Argument presented: P1: if not under the law, no judgment for sin; P2: there is judgment for sin; C: therefore we are under the law. Winger responds by disambiguating "judgment for sin" — there is a different kind of judgment for believers vs. unbelievers. Being under grace does not eliminate all accountability for sin. The equivocation in the syllogism prevents the conclusion.