The judgment below

The guilty portion against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

Seized No. 1.

【Judgment on Grounds for Appeal】

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the part on violation of the Game Industry Promotion Act due to the provision of game products in violation of the rating classification by the Defendant, the Defendant did not provide game products different from the contents rated by the Game Rating Board, and there was no intention to provide the game products in violation of the rating classification (fact-finding) and the lower court’s punishment against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

(F) 2.2

The judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged on the ground that there is no evidence to acknowledge it, although the defendant exchanged points obtained as a result of the game in cash to customers in the game operated by himself and caused them to perform speculative acts such as gambling by using game products.

In addition, the sentence of the court below against the defendant is too unjustifiable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by both ex officio determination prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal.

Where concurrent crimes prescribed by the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act before a judgment of the first instance was rendered after the judgment of the appellate court was rendered and a final and conclusive judgment to sentence punishment was rendered pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, the appellate court shall ex officio reverse the judgment of the first instance and

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Do15253 Decided January 13, 201, and Supreme Court Decision 2012Do9295 Decided September 27, 2012, etc.). According to the records, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor at the Suwon District Court on July 25, 2013 and one year and six months, and the said judgment on October 24, 2013 is deemed to have become final and conclusive. Thus, the crime of this case for which the said judgment became final and conclusive are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained in this respect, since the punishment is to be determined in consideration of equity in the case of concurrent judgment pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act by reversal ex officio.

(b).