The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s penalty of KRW 1,00,000 (fine 1,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Reviewing the reasoning for appeal ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, based on evidence, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for eight months on November 30, 201 for a violation of the Act on the Promotion of Separate Game Industry (Cheongju District Court 2010Sang2056), and the above judgment became final and conclusive on April 15, 201.

However, in the event that the sentence of this case is determined pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act because the defendant's crime of violation of the Act on the Promotion of Game Industry and the crime of this case, which became final and conclusive, constitutes concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, a sentence shall be imposed in consideration of equity with the case where

Nevertheless, the court below neglected this, so the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained in this respect.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, on the ground that the above ground for ex officio reversal exists, and the judgment below is again decided as follows.

[C] The summary of the facts constituting a crime and the evidence admitted by the court in light of the substance of the facts constituting a crime and the summary of the evidence are as follows: “The defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for eight months at the Cheongju District Court on November 30, 2010 for a violation of the Game Industry Promotion Act, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on April 15, 201,” and “1. In the summary of the evidence” as stated in the judgment of the court below, except for addition of the Defendant’s trial testimony and case search, it is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts and Articles 152 subparagraph 1 and 43 of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of fines and the selection of fines for the crime;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 of the Criminal Code to treat concurrent crimes.