beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.05.31 2017가단546015

게임기 인도

Text

1. The defendant shall set forth in Paragraph 1 of the attached game machine list to the plaintiff A and Paragraph 2 of the same Table to the plaintiff B.

Reasons

Facts of recognition

C In the event that a game machine is installed in Gyeonggi-gu D and the second floor “E” and a game room is operated in general, customers are invited to exchange points obtained through a game machine in the above game room between F and F, and from January 2017, the same year from F and F on January 2017.

3. From the day of February 21, 200, each game machine listed in the separate game machine list (hereinafter “instant game machine”) was installed in the above game room, and if the points obtained after the game was conducted by customers are above 20,000 won, the crime was committed by calculating the amount of 10,000 won in cash per 10,000 won, deducting the fee of 10%, and exchanging the remainder in cash.

C On November 22, 2017, the District Court 2017Kadan2650 rendered a suspended sentence of 10 months for the above criminal facts, and sentenced 2 years for suspended sentence and forfeiture of the instant game machine. The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

On the other hand, C is operating the game room as above by leasing the game machine listed in Paragraph 1 of the attached game machine list from the Plaintiff, and the game machine listed in Paragraph 2 of the attached list from the Plaintiff B.

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence 2, 3, 6-1, 2, 7, 8, 9-1, 2, 10-1, 10-2, 13-1, 2, 14, 15, and 15-1, 3-2, and 13-1, 13-2, 14, and 15-15 of the evidence, and the plaintiffs' assertion that the plaintiffs' assertion that the whole purport of the pleading was the whole purport of the pleading committed the above crime by leasing it from the plaintiffs who are the owners of the game machine of this case, and the defendant is obligated to deliver the game machine of this case

Confiscation of the Defendant’s assertion on the game machine of this case is justifiable under Article 44(2) of the Game Industry Promotion Act. Since the game machine of this case is subject to destruction under Article 484 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the claim of this case is unfair.

Judgment

Article 44 (2) of the Game Industry Promotion Act is a game product owned or occupied by a person falling under the provisions of paragraph (1) or a crime thereof.