beta
(영문) 제주지방법원 2020.12.18 2020고단2532

게임산업진흥에관한법률위반

Text

1. The defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for eight months;

However, the above defendant shall be the defendant for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is the actual operator of the "DPC" game room in the P and the second floor of Seopopo-si, and Defendant B is the employee of the above game room.

1. A person who intends to conduct a single juvenile game providing business or a business providing Internet computer game facilities by Defendant A shall register with the Special Self-Governing City Mayor or the head of Si/Gun/Gu, along

Defendant

A, from July 18:00 to 23:50 on July 6, 2020, from the above DPC to the competent authority, 40 game instruments in which the “Gme Ste”, a mobile Asian game, was installed, and operated Internet computer game facilities by allowing many unspecified customers to use the game machine.

2. No one shall exchange or arrange for exchange or repurchase of tangible or intangible results (referring to game money prescribed by Presidential Decree and things similar thereto prescribed by Presidential Decree, such as score, premiums, and virtual currency used in game) obtained through the use of game products by the Defendants as a business;

At the time and place mentioned in paragraph (1) in collusion, the Defendants used the said “Game” game machine to Defendant B, who was an employee, and the Defendant Company A instructed Defendant B, to convert the points indicated in the “BNK” column into KRW 10,000 per 10,000,000, and to change them into cash after deducting 10% from the fees. Defendant B, a customer, who was found in his place in accordance with Defendant A’s instructions, exchanged the said game machine to KRW 280,000,000, excluding the fees indicated on the screen of the game machine.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendants limited to this law.