게임산업진흥에관한법률위반등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is G G that actually runs the game of this case, and the defendant is merely involved in the operation of the game room by taking a role as an assistant to recover the money lent to the above G, but the judgment of the court below that sentenced the defendant to imprisonment with prison labor for the same 10 months as the owner of the game room is too unreasonable in light of the degree of the defendant's participation.
2. In the judgment, the defendant prepared and submitted a letter that corresponds to the above argument of the defendant; Co-defendant C in the court below made a statement to the effect that "G was the actual owner of the game room and the defendant lent money to G" in the investigative agency; and that L, the wife of Co-defendant B in the court below, made a statement to the effect that "G was the actual owner of the game room" in the investigative agency, and there was no evidence or circumstance corresponding to the defendant's defense that the actual owner of the game room of this case was "G was the actual owner of the game room."
However, in light of the fact that the defendant knew that he was operating a game room jointly with the defendant and G until he was aware that he was operating a game room, and that he was aware that he was operating a game room jointly with the defendant and G until he was aware that he was operating a game room, after he was aware that he was aware that he was operating a game room jointly, the defendant was operating a game room in light of the fact that he was able to manage the entire game room and settling accounts daily and brought 300,000 won out of profits.