beta
Text
All of the appeals by the prosecutor against the Defendants and Defendant C are dismissed.
Reasons
1. On November 8, 2013, the Defendant did not submit a legitimate statement of grounds for appeal even when he/she was served with the notification of the receipt of the trial records on November 8, 2013, and the petition of appeal does not contain any statement of grounds for appeal
Even after examining records, there is no reason to reverse the judgment of the court below after ex officio investigation.
Therefore, since the appeal by the defendant is unlawful, it shall be dismissed by the ruling in accordance with Articles 361-4(1) and 361-3(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, as long as the court decides on the appeal by the prosecutor as follows, it shall be dismissed
2. Judgment on the prosecutor's appeal
A. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s sentence (for each of the Defendants A and B, 6 months of imprisonment, 2 years of probation, 80 hours of community service order, confiscation, 5 million won of fine, confiscation, Defendant C: imprisonment for eight months of probation, 2 years of probation, 80 hours of community service order, 80 hours of probation, 80 hours of confiscation) against the Defendants is too unreasonable.
B. The judgment of Defendant A provided game products different from the contents rated by the Rating Board (hereinafter “instant game site”). Defendant A did not reflect the fact that the game site operated without permission was controlled by Defendant D and B, and Defendant A provided the game site to facilitate the operation of the instant game site. The crime is not good in light of the circumstances of aiding and abetting the above Defendants. Defendant D and B knew that the instant game site was provided with game products different from the contents rated by the Rating Board, with the knowledge that Defendant A received and operated the game site without permission, and arranged to exchange the result obtained through the use of the game product. Defendant D and B are also crimes of the same kind as the instant crime. Defendant C is also crimes of the same type as the instant crime.