A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

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

Punishment of the crime

피고인은 2014. 8. 21.경부터 같은 달 22.경까지 대구 남구 B, 3층에 있는 C오락실에서, ‘사냥꾼’ 게임기 42대 중 20대에 등급을 받지 아니한 ‘바다이야기’ 게임물을 내장시킨 후 D 등 불특정 다수의 손님들로 하여금 게임기에 1만 원권을 투입하게 한 후 전자릴이 회전하여 우연에 의하여 상어나 고래가 연속적으로 나오는 결과에 따라 미리 정해진 배율에 의하여 점수가 올라가는 게임을 하게 하고, 손님들이 획득한 점수가 게임기 화면에 표시되면 1점당 5,000원으로 환산하여 수수료 명목으로 10%를 공제한 4,500원을 현금으로 환전해 주었다.

As a result, the Defendant, using a machine that is likely to attract speculative spirit in the above manner, was engaged in the business of doing speculative acts that cause property gains or losses to the users and exchanging the result of games according to the incidental outcome, and provided the game products not rated to the customers for their use.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Written statements of D and E;

1. The police seizure record and the list of seizure;

1. Copy of the control report on public morals and business office;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on control field photographs;

1. Article 44 (1) 2 of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, Etc. and Article 30 (1) 1 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment of Speculative Acts, Articles 44 (1) 2 and 32 (1) 1 of the Act on the Promotion of the Game Industry (the point of providing game products), Articles 44 (1) 2 and 32 (1) 7 of the Game Industry Promotion Act (the point of operating a transshipment business), and Article 30 (1) 1 of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, Etc.

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 44(2) of the Confiscation Industry Promotion Act is that the period and size of the entertainment room in this case, and the defendant's mistake is divided.