beta
Text
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment of eight months, by imprisonment of four months, and by fine of two million won, respectively.
Defendant .
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant
A is a person who operates a "G" game room in the F shopping district in the East Sea, and Defendant B is an employee who has overall control over affairs such as money exchange in the above game room, and Defendant C is an employee in charge of affairs such as delivering money exchanged in response to the above game room.
1. No person related to money exchange business shall engage in the business of converting into money or arranging such conversion or repurchase of tangible or intangible results obtained through the use of game water;
Nevertheless, from November 13, 201 to August 18, 201 of the same month, Defendant A established 40 game machine for “scambling” in the above game room from November 13, 2017 to Defendant B, who is in charge of money exchange business while staying in the above game room, and Defendant C conspired to assist money exchange business and operated the game room, and if many unspecified customers request to refund points obtained through the use of the game product installed in the above game room, Defendant C exchanged 1,000 won after deducting 10% per fee from 10,000 won per fee.
As a result, Defendants conspired to exchange tangible and intangible results obtained through the use of game water for business purposes.
2. No one related to rating shall provide game products for use other than those of which rating has been classified;
Nevertheless, the Defendants do not have any influence on the outcome of the game for the purpose of using it for money exchange business at the time and place mentioned in the above paragraph 1.
“Along with the appearance of a certain background screen,” which is classified into the content as “grades,” the game machine was put into operation in the form of recording in a separate settlement window by obtaining points.
As a result, the Defendants conspired to offer a game product different from the game product classified as ratings to unspecified customers for use.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendants’ 1.