게임산업진흥에관한법률위반등
All appeals filed by prosecutors and defendants are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The punishment sentenced by the court below (two months of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unhued and unjust.
B. (1) Defendant (1) was the actual business owner of misunderstanding the facts, and the Defendant was introduced only to A who served as the president via E, but the judgment of the court below which found Defendant guilty of the crime of capital flight among the facts charged in the instant case is erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles.
(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing is excessively unreasonable.
2. The Defendant asserts that the Defendant independently operated the game of this case and that the Defendant did not commit a crime of escape as long as E is not an unemployment share. However, in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, it is recognized that the unemployment of the game of this case is E, and that the Defendant had an investigative agency escape from E through false statements.
A. At the time of the control of the game room, the Defendant argued that, in the police investigation process, he did not amount to mere employees, such as stating that “the President had been forced to stop electricity if the police had been off,” the Defendant made a statement to the effect that he had a specific direction on the situation at the time of control, i.e., the president who issued him/her at the time of the control, and that he/she had been given 10,000 won per day when he/she made a statement to A, and that he/she was paid 10,000 won per day when he/she made a statement to be a unemployment owner, and that the settlement of the daily income after the business was reported by the president, if the president did not exist, and that he/she was paid money later.
It is difficult to accept such defendant's assertion that he/she is the actual owner of the business with the reversal of his/her own statement without any justifiable reason during the trial process.
B. The instant case.