beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals filed by A and prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Prosecutor’s sentence (Defendant A: imprisonment for 8 months, 2 years of probation, 2 years of probation, observation of protection, 80 hours of community service, confiscation, Defendant B: imprisonment for 8 months of probation, 2 years of probation, observation of protection, community service, 80 hours of confiscation) is too uneasy and unfair.
B. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles: Defendant A did not compete with Defendant B.
2) Improper sentencing: The lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Determination on Defendant A’s misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles 1) The lower court rendered a conviction against the Defendant by comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances:
① In spite of the fact that the users of the F Game funeral are able to verify the points remaining on the card without any inconvenience only by means of verifying the points installed in the catter, Defendant A installed one additional mark in a smoking room located away from the catter and the number of meters.
② Defendant B showed a very high-depth appearance in regulating authorities, such as refusing to exchange, which does not comply with the allegations by the said Defendant that the principal purchased the points card personally intended to play games at a certain place.
(3) No defendant A has commenced a game room business with a score card of 200 head and purchased additional score cards.
Considering the number of users of the game room and the quantity of points cards purchased by Defendant B per day, if Defendant A does not recover points cards from Defendant B, it seems impossible to operate the game room business itself.
④ At the time of the two-time police investigation, Defendant B exchanged KRW 20 to 30 million a day, and that money was possessed by the Defendant.
was stated.
However, on September 3, 2015, the above defendant exchanged 3.6 million won to one female customer, and the remaining marbs were put to a large extent, and the above defendant was used by other users for his own use.