게임산업진흥에관한법률위반
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.
In 2014, seized Korean District Prosecutors' Office is pressured by 2014.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the punishment of eight-month imprisonment imposed by the lower court is too excessive and unfair (the Defendant explicitly withdrawn his/her assertion that he/she is erroneous as to the facts stated in the instant petition of appeal on November 11, 2015 from the date of the first trial of the first instance court). 2. On the grounds for appeal, the crime of this case committed by the Defendant is likely to promote an excessive speculative spirit among the general public by facilitating the crime of this case, and thus, should be eradicated with serious social harm in light of the contents of the crime, the circumstances leading up to the crime, the legal interests protected, etc., and in particular, even if it has been controlled twice, the Defendant’s unfavorable circumstances are recognized, such as the provision of a re-game game machine and continuing to conduct business.
However, in light of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant denied a part of the facts charged at the lower court’s trial and stated that the Defendant was aware of the entire facts charged of the instant case and against the mistake thereof; (b) there are some grounds for taking into account the motive and circumstances leading to the instant crime; (c) there is no previous conviction and no criminal record beyond the fine; and (d) the Defendant’s dependants want to leave the game room; and (c) appears to have discontinued the game of this case; and (d) the Defendant’s age, sex, conduct, intelligence and environment, and the motive and background, means and consequence of the instant crime; (d) the size of the place of business, the period of business, circumstances after the instant crime, family relations, health status, and criminal records; and (e) the Defendant’s assertion is unreasonable since the Defendant’s punishment imposed by the lower court is too excessive to maintain it as it is, the Defendant’s assertion has merit.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the judgment below is ruled again as follows.
Criminal facts
this Court recognizes the substance of the evidence and the summary thereof.