logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2017.05.18 2017고단388
게임산업진흥에관한법률위반
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for eight months and by imprisonment for six months.

Nos. 1 through 8 of seized evidence.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is an operator of the "H Gameland" in Ulsan-gu G, Ulsan-gu, and Defendant B is a person in charge of exchanging in the above game site.

No one shall make a business exchange, exchange, arrange for exchange or repurchase of tangible or intangible results obtained through the use of game water.

From early 2016 to August 26, 2016, the Defendants installed 70 game water in total, including 10,000 won in the above game, 30, 20, 20, 30, 20, 20, and 20, 30,000, and 70,000 won in the “sea” game, and, if an unspecified customer requests to refund the game score obtained by inserting cash in the above game machine, the Defendants exchanged the said game score as KRW 10,00 per point after deducting the fee from 10,000.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to exchange tangible and intangible results obtained through the use of game water for business purposes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of the Defendants’ legal statements

1. Each legal statement of a witness I, J and K;

1. Each legal statement of witness, L, B and M;

1. Seizure records;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of each photograph and lease contract;

1. Article 44 (1) 2 and Article 32 (1) 7 of the Act on the Promotion of Game Industry, Article 30 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Confiscation (Defendant A) Article 48(1) of the Criminal Act / [Grounds for guilt]

1. Defendant A asserted that “Defendant B was only exchanged in the game of this case on an individual basis, and the Defendant was not aware of such personal exchange as Defendant B’s above, and Defendant B was merely a public offering to customers, not an employee, and Defendant B was merely a public offering to customers.” Defendant B also asserted the same as this.

2. As a result of the examination of the game I and J directly conducted by the head of the game room at the time of enforcement, “Defendant B has exchanged the points obtained by the customer after deducting the fee, and such exchange is made.

arrow