게임산업진흥에관한법률위반등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Of the facts charged in the instant case, as to a violation of the Game Industry Promotion Act from September 30, 2016 to October 7, 2016, the Defendant did not provide a large number of customers with the game products which were not rated by the so-called “Bol president,” and did not directly exchange them.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found this part of the facts charged guilty is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the judgment.
B. The sentence that the court below rendered unfair sentencing (such as 1.6 months, 12.2 million won, etc.) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination:
A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant is the owner of the relevant game site in an investigative agency, and the Defendant stated in detail in the investigation agency on the fact that he/she employs C as an employee, the preparation of opening business funds, the conclusion of a building rental agreement, and the method of purchasing a
In addition, since C was exchanged according to the direction of one defendant, it was also recognized that the crime was committed on the part of exchange.
In addition, although the defendant and his defense counsel agreed to the contents stated by C in the investigative agency and the interrogation protocol for the police and the prosecution against C, the declaration of consent to evidence under Article 318 of the Criminal Procedure Act is not recognized after the examination of evidence is completed (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do4428, Apr. 28, 2005). Thus, each of the interrogation records for the defendant are admissible.
shall be consistent with this section.
In full view of the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below as well as the above points, the defendant operated the game room.
The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is just, since the profit of money exchange also belongs to the defendant who is the operator.
B. Illegal assertion of sentencing.