[Defendant A] The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a year and six months.

Nos. 1, 4 through 7, 9, of seized evidence.

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] Defendant D was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for a violation of the Labor Standards Act at the Busan District Court on October 29, 2018, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on September 27, 2019.

Defendant

E On February 23, 2018, the same year is sentenced to imprisonment with labor for a violation of the Game Industry Promotion Act at the Busan District Court.

9.7 The above judgment was finalized.

【Criminal Facts】

Defendant

A A was a person who planned and controlled the production and distribution of a speculative game machine and employed Defendant B and Defendant C on May 2017. Defendant B (one name “G”) created a speculative game program by carrying out a speculative function such as an example and a chain. Defendant C is a person who filed an application for rating with the Game Management Committee in order to obtain rating as the game machine created by Defendant B is “total user”.

Defendant

D As the representative of (State) H, from around April 2016 to April 2017, Defendant B and Defendant C engaged in the business of producing and developing a game machine program by employing Defendant B and Defendant C, and produced a speculative game machine with Defendant A’s appearance. Defendant E and Defendant F are those who provided Defendant A with a business name necessary for rating classification.

1. No person who commits a joint principal offense by Defendant A, Defendant B, Defendant D, or Defendant E shall have a legitimate title or receive a rating of game products by fraud or other improper means;

Defendants conspired in sequentially, around the end of 2016, to request Defendant D to produce a program of speculative game apparatus and to consent thereto, Defendant D, an employee, in return for development costs from Defendant A, and let Defendant B produce a program of speculative game, and Defendant B, an employee, develop a game program so that it is difficult for the Game Rating Board to detect the speculative function by means of encryptioning the probability (e.g., visual and chain) function. On the other hand, Defendant A operated I.