사행행위등규제및처벌특례법위반등
The judgment below
The part against the Defendants is reversed.
Defendant
D Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, and Defendant E.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal of this case is improper because each of the punishments (two years of imprisonment, one year and two months of imprisonment, one year and two months of confiscation) declared by the court below is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The crime of this case committed by Defendant D is very serious in light of the following: (a) the Defendant provided customers with contents different from the game products rated in the course of running an illegal game room for four occasions in collaboration with the game room business owner or the defendant; (b) provided customers with contents different from those of the game products rated; and (c) instigated the above defendants H, G, and F to make false statements rather than the defendant as the actual business owner in the above game room; and (d) repeatedly caused social harm to the defendant; and (c) caused considerable obstacle to the investigation by the investigative agency on the ground of the so-called "the President of the Bab" who tried to be exempted from his responsibility.
In addition, even though the Defendant had been subject to punishment for the same crime in 2010 before committing the instant crime, it is difficult to view that the Defendant again committed each of the instant crimes, thereby undermining the risk of recidivism.
In addition, considering the fact that the defendant was under the control of illegal game room business, but the defendant moved to another place and operated the illegal game room, it is necessary to punish the defendant strictly.
However, the Defendant committed all of the crimes in this case, and shows his attitude to repent of his mistake.
Furthermore, it seems that the business period is relatively short compared to the number of each of the crimes in this case because the defendant's early crackdowns on the fact that the defendant actually acquired profits.
In addition, the defendant did not have any record of punishment before committing the crime of this case, and has become economically difficult to do so under the sludge, and the real name of the left side during the work of 10 years has become a disability (class 6).