A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for eight months and by imprisonment for six months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

The Defendants were to operate the entertainment room as Defendant A’s proposal, and Defendant B provided funds necessary for the operation of the above game room. Defendant A decided to take overall charge of the business as an employee, and Defendant C and 2 operated “D game room” from February 2, 2014 to September 6, 2014.

The Defendants, who found the above game room, had the intent to exchange the outcome, such as score obtained by using the game in cash, installed 50 game machine in the above game room on May 2014, and provided an unspecified number of customers by replacing the above game machine as 50 in around July 2014.

1. On May 22, 2014, Defendant A exchanged points of 50,000 won in cash with the point of 50,000 obtained by Defendant A using the “jacker” game in the said game room around 23:00.

2. At around 22:50 on September 1, 2014, Defendant A exchanged F’s points of 50,000 won in cash with the “nivers” game within the said game room.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to exchange the results obtained through the use of game products.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. A written statement;

1. Police seizure records;

1. Application of statutes on field photographs;

1. Article 44 (1) 2 and Article 32 (1) 7 of the Act on the Promotion of Game Industry and Article 30 of the Criminal Act concerning the relevant criminal facts, the choice of punishment, and Articles 30 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended execution;

1. Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of each community service order;

1. Article 44 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the Promotion of Confiscation Industry;