(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.08.17 2014노2213 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.08.17 2014노2213

게임산업진흥에관한법률위반

Text

1. The judgment below is reversed.

2. Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.

3. The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.

Reasons

1. With respect to the part not guilty in the judgment of the court below as to the summary of the grounds for appeal, the court below found the defendant not guilty on the ground that there was no evidence to acknowledge this part of the facts charged, even though the defendant's "WAER-B" game products are game products with contents different from those classified by the council of the game product grade members, according to the records of the first interrogation protocol (Evidence No. 79 of evidence No. 1 of the evidence record) prepared by the judicial police officers against the defendant on the first time.

2. Determination

(a) No person charged with this part of the facts charged shall provide the distribution or use of, or display or store for, game products with contents different from those classified by the game water grade committee by the game water grade committee;

Nevertheless, from the beginning of February 2013 to May 22:2, 2013, the Defendant respectively set up 30 games of “SB 2” and 10 games of “WAST-B”, which are different from the contents classified by the Assembly of the Game Rating Board members, on the third floor of the building in Tong Young-si, Tong Young-si, 2013, and which are different from the contents classified by the said Council, and kept them for the use of an unspecified number of customers.

B. The lower court found the Defendant’s possession of the game product at the time of regulating the instant solar 2 game product and WATPP-B game product, and thus, it was impossible to verify the content of the game product. The lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged on the grounds that there was no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant’s storage of the game product was a game product with the content altered differently from the content classified by the Defendant, on the ground that there was no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant’s storage of the game product was a game product with the content altered differently from the content classified by the two Ber 2 game machine and WATPP-B game product.

(c)

(1) February 2013, 2010.

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2016.04.15 2015노966

-수원지방법원 안양지원 2016.07.21 2016고정190

-수원지방법원 평택지원 2018.12.13 2017고단2491

-수원지방법원 평택지원 2017.11.29 2017고단1845

-부산지방법원 2017.06.23 2017고단1953