Defendant

A, B, and C shall be punished by imprisonment of 10 months, and Defendant D.

A. The Defendants provided game products with contents different from the rating of the game product by mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (as to the part of prosecutor’s or not guilty)

must be viewed.

However, the lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on this part of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The Defendants asserts that the punishment (the prosecutor and the Defendants) declared by the lower court (the imprisonment of 10 months for each of the Defendant A, B, and C, and the fine of 3 million won for each of the Defendant D) is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor is too unfasible and unfair.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant and the Prosecutor, the Prosecutor applied for changes in the indictment of this case as stated in the following facts charged at the time of the trial, and the subject of the judgment upon permission by a party member was changed. Thus, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.

However, notwithstanding the above reasons for ex officio reversal, the facts charged by the court below and the facts charged changed in the trial at the court below are substantially identical, and the reasons for the prosecutor’s appeal are subject to the judgment at this court, and the following are examined.

3. Determination of the Prosecutor’s misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine

가. 원심의 판단 원심은, 증거에 의하면 ① 피고인 측에서 제공한 똑딱이는 게임 물 이용자의 게임 물 이용을 보조할 뿐 게임 물의 내용에 변경을 가져오는 것이 아닌 점, ② I/O 보드의 스위치를 변경하였다는 부분은 이 사건 게임 물의 내용에는 아무런 변화가 없는 것으로 보이는 점을 인정할 수 있을 뿐이고, 검사가 제출한 증거만으로는 피고인 측에서 등급을 받은 내용과 다른 내용의 게임 물을 불특정 다수의 손님들의 이용에 제공하였다는 사실을 인정하기 어렵고, 달리...