logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.12 2018고단2988
게임산업진흥에관한법률위반
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A operated the game room in the name of “E” on the first floor of the Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Building, from March 20, 2018 to May 1, 2018, a game room of 50 games in the above game room was installed and provided to customers. Defendant B was in charge of the duties of exchanging game points in cash at the carter in the above game room.

The “Sewcheon Game” refers to the Daejeon Game, Daejeon Game, where the use fee of the game was set at KRW 100 to KRW 500, and where the physical strength of the above character is zero by attacking the CPU character by means of an attack card selected by using comics and burners, the class of the entire use fee is classified from the Game Rating Board in a manner that does not achieve the purpose of the game, rather than active manipulation of the user. However, if the above game is repeated by simple repetition without using a shot, the “CREIT” game installed in the above game is deducted by 100 won for each card attack without the use of a shot, and the screen goes beyond the screen, and if the character of the above character, such as cREIT, cry, repair, etc., appeared, then 200 to 200 to 200 to 300 to 310 to 20 to 30 to 30.”

The Defendants conspired to provide customers with the above modified 'SPECAL CARD' score per 4,500 won per 10% of the 'SPECAL CARD' score when customers want to exchange.

As a result, Defendants conspired to offer game water to use contents different from the rating classified by the Game Water Management Committee, and they exchanged tangible and intangible results acquired by customers through the use of game water as a business.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Second-time protocol concerning defendant F concerning the interrogation of suspect by the prosecution;

1. Each protocol of seizure;

1. Account books, etc. of screen pictures and disbursement details after the closure of a daily fix, each course of closure.

arrow