A Imprisonment for six months, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

Defendant

B A. A fine shall not be paid.

Defendant

B is the owner of the business of the head of the "E" game on the D1st floor in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, and the defendant A, the head of the defendant B, is a person who managed money exchange, customers and employees in the game site.

No one shall engage in the business of exchanging or arranging money exchange of tangible or intangible results obtained through the use of game water.

1. From September 2015 to July 7, 2016, Defendant A requested “E” to set up the “E” game machine, 30, 20, 30, 20, 20, 10, 20, and 50,000,000,000 won per 50,000,000,000,000 won for customers to set up a total of 60,000,000,000,000 won for each game machine, and used the game to set up the 10,000 won.

Accordingly, the defendant was a business to exchange tangible and intangible results obtained through the use of game water.

2. Defendant B, who is an employee of the Defendant, committed a violation against the Defendant’s duty, as set forth in paragraph (1).

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. A report on investigation (related to money exchange activities);

1. Police seizure records;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing exchange videos;

1. Article 44 (1) 2 and Article 32 (1) 7 (Selection of Punishment) of the Act on the Promotion of Game Industry: Defendant B: Articles 47, 44 (1) 2, and 32 (1) 7 of the Act on the Promotion of Game Industry;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2)(b) of the Criminal Act (Defendant B) to attract a workhouse;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 44(2) of the Game Industry Promotion Act, Article 48(1)1 and 2 of the Criminal Act (Defendant A, No. 1 through No. 8, game machines and criminal proceeds, etc.), the background leading up to the crime, the period of the crime, the period of the crime, the defendants' mistake, and the fact that the defendants are contrary to the fact that there is no same criminal record and only one fine.