logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2019.07.19 2019노1049
게임산업진흥에관한법률위반
Text

The judgment below

The penalty collection portion shall be reversed.

28,500,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

The above additional collection charge.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Criminal proceeds subject to the calculation of additional collection charges and the misunderstanding of legal principles under the Act on the Promotion of Game Industry refers to the proceeds actually accrued. Although the proceeds actually accrued by the defendant are only KRW 57 million, the court below erred in collecting additional collection from the defendant.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the additional collection

A. Relevant legal principles 1) Since the purpose of collection of the proceeds derived from a criminal act in violation of Article 44(1) of the Game Industry Promotion Act is to deprive a person of unlawful profits and prevent him/her from possessing them, where several persons jointly gain profits from the business of an illegal game room, only the distributed money, i.e., the profit actually accrued, shall be collected, and where it is impossible to determine the allocated amount, the money distributed shall be collected equally (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do1312, Jun. 26, 2008). Meanwhile, in collecting the proceeds of the crime, the expenses paid by the criminal to obtain the proceeds of the crime was disbursed from the proceeds of the crime.

Even if the method of consuming criminal proceeds is not only a method of consuming criminal proceeds, and thus, it cannot be deducted from criminal proceeds to be collected. Thus, the benefits paid by the defendant to his/her employees while operating the game room cannot be deducted from criminal proceeds to be collected by the

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do8330, Dec. 13, 2007). B.

Judgment

In light of the above legal principles, the court below held that the defendant was to operate the case together with B and D, and that E was to be entrusted with the president in the name of D, and made E to register the juvenile game providing business with respect to D, F to manage the customers and employees of the above game room, and to have G exchange work.

arrow