beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10,000,000.
Defendant .
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The defendant A is the actual owner of the game of this case, and the defendant C is merely the owner of the game of this case's game hall.
Nevertheless, the court below found all of the charges of this case guilty, and the judgment of the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (Defendant A: a fine of KRW 20 million, confiscation, Defendant C: a fine of KRW 30 million, confiscation) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination:
A. The following facts acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined in the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts: (i) H, F, and Co-defendant B, an employee of the game site of this case, stated that they were women engaged in the game site of this case at the first police investigation (Article 56, 82, 113, 119 of the investigation record), F, and E mobile phones, each of the Defendant C stored as “Creging” (Article 133-134, 164 of the investigation record); (ii) the F stated that the Defendant was dead and lost only the money of the Carbreg that the Defendant was dead (Article 79 of the investigation record); (ii) the Defendant made a statement that 80,000 won, the first day, and 50,000 won, which was the second day (Article 193 of the investigation record); but (iii) Defendant A engaged in the business from May 3, 2012 to May 3, 2012.
6.1. up to one day, in Seongdong-gu Seoul, where the game site of this case is located, Defendant A did not have the monetary content of Defendant A (Article 735 of the Investigation Record), ③ Defendant A reported and employed Internet recruitment advertisement (Article 191, 732 of the Investigation Record), and Defendant B made a statement that he was employed by friendly introduction (Article 191, 732 of the Investigation Record), F and E are confirmed to have been exchanged from April 17, 2012 (Article 707, 716, 743 of the Investigation Record), ④ Defendant C made a statement that he had been unaware before the instant case, and it stated that he was aware that he was killed before 6 months prior to the instant report (Article 723 of the Investigation Record) and that he leased the game site of this case (Article 723 of the Investigation Record).