A. The right to recommend a mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is merely to allow customers of the game of this case to play a game again by using the remaining points, and the defendant has caused the above reuse right to exchange or arrange money exchange.

As long as it cannot be deemed that the said reuse right does not constitute an “property interest” as a “registered securities” and thus, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant issued and exchanged the said reuse right and let the customers engage in gambling and other speculative acts by using the game products, or left the customers to do so.

In addition, the defendant reported to the prosecutor's office's non-guilty decision and the court's acquittal decision in a similar case, and the defendant did not have any awareness and intent of illegality, and the defendant's act constitutes a mistake of law which misleads that his act does not constitute a crime under the law, and thus the illegality is excluded.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the following circumstances can be comprehensively acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the trial court. ① The points indicated in the “credit” window of the game of this case refer to the amount of cash that customers invested in the game machine at the pre-use stage of the game of this case, and the points indicated in the “bank” window refer to the results obtained through the use of the game product by the customer. The Defendant entered the points by using a cash register of 10,000 won based on the total sum of the points remaining in the creation and the “bank” book of the above “credit” and the “bank” game of this case.