beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
A Imprisonment with prison labor for two years and for one year and six months, respectively.
Defendant .
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The lower court rendered a judgment on the charge of collecting KRW 168 million from Defendant A and KRW 172.5 million from Defendant B, respectively.
However, the profits that the Defendants received while operating the Internet illegal gambling site (hereinafter “instant site”) as stated in the judgment of the court below are either difficult or at least less than the amount of the above additional collection.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in finding facts concerning additional collection.
2) Each sentence of the lower court (Defendant A: 2 years of imprisonment; Defendant B’s imprisonment with prison labor for a period of one year and six months) against the illegal Defendants in sentencing is unfair.
B. Each sentence of the lower court against the Defendants by the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.
2. Review ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.
In the trial of the prosecutor, the prosecutor applied for the amendment of the indictment with the following changes in the facts charged 1, and this court permitted this and changed the subject of the trial, so the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.
【Revised Facts】
1. As to the “F” (G, H, and I) Internet illegal gambling sites, which are sports promotion voting tickets issued under the National Sports Promotion Act operated by the Defendants-friendly E by the Defendants, the Defendants: (a) worked as an employee of the above site call center office from around December 2, 2012 to August 2013; and (b) conspired from around September 2013 to March 2015 to jointly operate the above site with E by acquiring shares in the above site from E.
Accordingly, the Defendants worked for the above office from around December 2012 to August 2013 as the employees of the above office, and Defendant A manages other employees.