(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.1.23.선고 2017고단3827 판결

2. The Defendant, at around October 2008, was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million by the Seoul Western District Court on December 26, 2008, when he/she was the head of the Z2 G2 Rig’s Z team secretariat and participated in the operation of K2 Rig Z games, and on December 26, 2008, he/she received a summary order of KRW 2 million as a result of the crime of interference with business.

From April 2010 to May 2010, the Defendant conspiredd to operate a professional axis, together with a defect, B, C, and E, that “A person (F, G) is entitled to betting in the area of betting in China,” while drinking up B, C, and E at the beginning of Seocho-gu Seoul, Seocho-gu, Seoul.”

3. 1. Bosco World Cup 2010 o-O-O-O on June 2, 2010

4. Since then, the Defendant received contact from E to inform C of the possible winner operation game, and C immediately contacted with E, and C paid KRW 50 million to the participating players belonging to the Mao Team, and sent to B the conditions of the winner operation offered by the above E by phone.

Accordingly, B sent the above G with the contact information of F or G, and E first paid KRW 20 million to the players who participated in the winner manipulation as down payment due to the winner manipulation.

5. On May 2, 2010, E requested H, a junior patrolman, to manipulate the winning part of the said games so that Mao-O-Ooo on June 2, 2010, he requested H to manipulate the winning part of the said games by proposing 20 million won to the next Mao player I.

Accordingly, J, K, L, and M, as team players such as I, participated in and distributed the price for the winning operation, and H transferred KRW 20 million to the deposit account in the name of N known by J on June 2, 2010.

Accordingly, in collusion with C, B, E, and H, the Defendant offered property and assets to I, M, J, K, and L, a player of an authorized sports betting event subject to the issuance of sports betting tickets.

6.2. Bosco World Cup 2010 o-O-O-O-O-O-O-O on June 6, 2010

7. On June 2, 2010, the Defendant, C, E, and B planned the Mao-O o-O on June 2, 2010, which came to an end with the free will, the Defendant was willing to again engage in the operation of other games, and the priorityE returned KRW 20 million from H in return for the winning operation, and C and B demanded I to re-be the Ma in order for Mao-O-Oo o-O o to wear the Mao-O o on June 6, 2010.

8. Since then, the Defendant: (a) heard the horses that “E,” introduced by C, would be in trust and in the future, would be contacted with E throughners; and (b) in response, the Defendant served as an intermediate communication between C and E, such as informing C and E of the players who participated in the Mao-O-O-O-O-O-O-O, on June 6, 2010, on the part of E, to inform C of the players who participated in the Mao-O-O-O-O-O-O's winner.

9. Since then, I, M, J, K, and L included in E, etc., did not actively participate in the attack, and they did not endeavor to prevent the attack of the other party, and they did not participate in the attack of the other party, and the number of team guards in the same team number as the unit number of the U.S. in the same team number of the U.S. in the same manner as the unit number of the U.S. in the U.S., and the E. Gao, a team of which the U.S. participated in the competition in a manner that does not prevent the other party attack, thereby making it possible for the U.S. to wear 20 oo, a team of which he belongs, to wear o o o o, and deliver C 40 million won from the distance of the R.S. located in the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Devise-dong.

Accordingly, in collusion with C, B, E, and H, the Defendant provided property by making illegal solicitation in connection with the business of I, M, J, K, and L, the player of an authorized sports betting event subject to the issuance of the sports betting ticket, and in collusion with C, B, H, I, M, J, K, and L in order, thereby impairing the fairness of sports subject to the issuance of the sports betting ticket and hindering the fair implementation thereof.

10.3. K- Rig 29 August 29, 2010 oo-O o-O on August 29, 2010

11. On August 29, 2010, the Defendant: (a) received a request from C for o-Oo-O to win the o-O's intentionally in the o-O-O-O; (b) requested E to leave the O to the friendly P of the o-O's O's fo's fo's fo's fo's fo's fo's fo's fo's fo's fo's fo's fo's fo's fo's fo's fo's fo's fo's fo's fo's fo's fo's fo'

12.O and Q revealed the fact that, as seen above, the players of the same team, R, S, and T, as well as the fact that, on August 29, 2010, o-O-O o-O o o o o o o o o o o o o o and agreed to receive the price, and that P, E, and the Defendant agreed to make the winning manipulation.

13. From August 25 to 26, 2010 to around 20:00, C delivered KRW 50 million as a consideration upon the request by the oo to remove the O on the front of the hospital located in the Mineyang-dong, Jeonyang-si.

14. Since August 29, 2010, R, Q and T moved to K-Loooooooooo games held in the Busan Asian District on August 19, 2010, and R, Q, the number of attack participants, did not fulfill their best to prevent the other party attack, and Q, the number of attackers, did not fulfill their best for the other party attack, and T, the number of attackers, was in the game in a way that the other party attack is not properly able to attack, and oo o o 5 to 3.

Accordingly, in collusion with C, E, and P, the Defendant offered property to the athletes, Q, R, and T of sports subject to the issuance of sports betting tickets with illegal solicitation in connection with their business, and conspired with C, E, P,O, Q, R, and T in sequence, thereby impairing the fairness of sports subject to the issuance of sports betting tickets and hindering the fair implementation thereof.

Summary of Evidence

o Defendant’s legal statement

o Examination of suspect suspect regarding C, B, E,O, J, T, R, S, Q, and P

o Court rulings on C, B, and E

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Articles 50 and 48(1) of the former National Sports Promotion Act (amended by Act No. 11309, Feb. 17, 2012; hereinafter the same) (amended by Act No. 11309, Feb. 17, 201); Article 47 of the former National Sports Promotion Act (amended by Act No. 11309, Feb. 17,

2. Mitigation of self-denunciation;

Articles 52(1) and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act

3. Aggravation for concurrent crimes; and

Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2, and 50 of the Criminal Act

Reasons for sentencing

The punishment shall be determined as ordered in consideration of the fact that the defendant's participation was not severe and that he/she voluntarily surrenders to a foreign country for a long time, and that he/she also runs away from the country.