상습도박
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.
However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Punishment of the crime
On June 25, 2015, the Defendant: (a) connected to “C”, a private gambling site, using a computer installed at the Defendant’s residence; (b) deposited KRW 4 million from “C”, the Defendant’s account in the name of Daegu Bank Account (number E), a private gambling site; and (c) deposited KRW 76,950,750,00 in a total amount of 71 times from around the time to August 17, 2016, the Defendant deposited the said website’s operating account (F) with the corresponding game money; and (d) deposited the same in one of the banks and flass, one of which is the highest numbers from 0 to 9; and (e) deposited the same in the Internet gambling method as indicated in the attached list of crimes, and (e) deposited KRW 276,950,750,750 from around the same time.
Summary of Evidence
1. Statement by the defendant in court;
1. Records, such as reports on commencement of internal investigation, investigation reports (Attachment of a statement of transaction), internal investigation reports (recordd documents, such as preparation of a list of crimes and transfer of cases), list of crimes, transfer of cases, etc.;
1. Habituality of judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes recognizing dampness in light of the method of crime, frequency of crime, period of crime, amount of commission, and repeated crimes of the same kind in the judgment;
1. Article 246 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime;
1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the suspended sentence under the Criminal Act committed repeatedly the instant crime even though the Defendant had been subject to a disposition of suspending indictment for the same kind of crime, in light of the frequency of gambling and the amount of gambling, etc., the nature of the instant crime is not good. On the other hand, the Defendant is against the time of committing the instant crime, and the Defendant is not re-offending again, and other circumstances shown in the instant argument are considered.