logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2020.09.17 2019고정1340 (1)
도박방조
Text

A fine of three million won shall be imposed on a defendant.

Where the above fine is not paid, one million won shall be converted into one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

In June 21, 2019, around 07:00 on June 21, 2019, the Defendant scarbling together with the total of five victims D, etc. in Geum-gu, Busan.

The victims do not observe time and try to see the first place in order to get money from the victims, and make money from the victims and cooperate with the victims.

In this regard, violence was committed against the victim, such as going beyond the victim, taking the face, chests, etc. several times, and the victim was injured, such as a scarfying wall that requires treatment of the victim for a two-time period of time.

2. On June 20, 201, from around 22:00 to around 07:00 on June 20, 2019, the Defendant, in collaboration with D, E, F, and G, sold KRW 5,00 by dividing 52 each card by 52 card within the Geum-gu, Busan by using 52 card, and distributed KRW 5,00,000, and then, carried out the card gambling, namely, “balk” and “baline” over approximately 80 times in a manner that the last winner would bring about the money.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the police interrogation of the accused;

1. Statement of each police statement regarding D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police seizure records;

1. Relevant Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 246 of the Criminal Act; and selection of fines;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act to be confiscated;

1. In accordance with Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, a copy of indictment was served by public notice and the trial proceedings in this case was conducted in the absence of the defendant, because the location of the defendant cannot be confirmed with the reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

The same sentence as the disposition shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the various sentencing conditions shown in the records, such as the contents of the instant crime and the degree of damage.

arrow