[사행행위등규제및처벌특례법위반][미간행]
The case holding that the defendant's entertainment equipment installed in a multi-facel operated by himself shall not be deemed to constitute "a machine or apparatus which is likely to cause gambling" under Article 30 (1) 4 of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, etc.
[1] Article 30 (1) 4 of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, etc.
Defendant
Prosecutor
Busan District Court Decision 2003No3344 delivered on December 3, 2003
The appeal is dismissed.
We examine the grounds of appeal.
Article 30 (1) 4 of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, Etc. provides that a person who conducts a business of giving financial benefits or losses to users according to a prone outcome shall be punished by using machines, apparatus, etc. which are likely to instigate speculative spirit, such as slot machines, mechanical slot machines, or speculative electronic gaming machines, in addition to speculative businesses under Article 2 (1) 1 of the same Act.
According to the records, the defendant set up one of the instant amusement machines in his operation. The method of using the instant amusement machines can only be known to the fact that the user puts the points given by inserting the 100 foot paper and gains or loses the points in accordance with the composition of the pictures or numbers shown on the screen when he takes a short-term entertainment machine. Furthermore, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the defendant paid money or exchangeable premiums to the user of the instant amusement machine according to the points that he obtained. Thus, if there are circumstances, it cannot be concluded that the instant amusement machine falls under the "mechanic and instruments that are likely to cause the gambling" stipulated in the above provision.
Although the reasoning of the judgment of the court below is somewhat insufficient, it is justified to reverse the judgment of the court of first instance which convicted the defendant and to find the defendant not guilty on the ground that there is no evidence that the amusement machine in this case is likely to cause a 's gambling', and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, Etc., and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Shin Shin-chul (Presiding Justice)