beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals filed by B and prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
. The lower court acknowledged the credibility of the above witness’s statement and determined that this part of the facts charged was proven. However, there is no special circumstance to deem that the lower court’s determination of credibility of the witness’s statement was significantly erroneous.
2) The rationale behind the Defendant’s favorable view is that the Defendant’s act of providing a game product different from the classified one on which the Defendant was subject to an unfair sentencing judgment is recognized, and that the period of committing the above crime is not less than six days, and that the Defendant does not seem to have a large amount of profit or business size. However, upon the control of the above crime, it is not good that the Defendant committed the crime, such as aiding and abetting the criminal from committing the crime, and attempted to conceal and conceal evidence, and attempted to do so, and is not against the Defendant’s act of aiding and abetting the criminal from committing the crime. The Defendant has the past record of criminal punishment more than twenty times, and there are two criminal records less than the suspended sentence, and the Defendant committed the instant crime during the suspended sentence period. Such circumstances, motive, means and results of the crime, the circumstances, Defendant’s age, character and behavior, and environment after the crime, and the scope of the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court and the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court (hereinafter June 2,
1. A violation of the Game Industry Promotion Act: The group of speculative game products, the provision for use of illegal game products, the first type (the provision for the use of game products different from the classification), the basic area, and six months to one year and two months;
2. The sentencing criteria for the crime of aiding and abetting an offender are not set.
* In full view of the recommendation sentence scope according to the majority crime processing criteria: imprisonment with prison labor for not less than six months is recommended, the lower court’s sentence is not considered to be excessively unreasonable.
3. In conclusion, the appeal by the defendant B and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.