logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1983. 6. 28. 선고 83도1044 판결
[도박][공1983.8.15.(710),1158]
Main Issues

Pursuant to the nature of gambling, 4,000 won abscam and abscambling (negative)

Summary of Judgment

After the same business operator's day and day, the act of drinking and drinking with a 4,000 won in solitary Skin as a result of one hour-friendly drinking, is limited to the degree of temporary entertainment and does not constitute a crime of gambling in full view of the following: (a) the act of drinking and drinking with a 4,000 won in solitary Skin money as a result of his/her personal intercourse; (b) his/her career, property level; (c) background and method of gambling; (d) relationship with him/her; and (e) relationship with him/her; and (c)

[Reference Provisions]

Article 246(1) of the Criminal Act

Escopics

Defendant

upper and high-ranking persons

Prosecutor

Judgment of the lower court

Daegu District Court Decision 82No974 delivered on December 9, 1982

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The prosecutor's grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance maintained by the court below, the defendant was a person operating a film meeting and was engaged in the same business as the plaintiff's four persons who were in a kind of fluencing with the same day after completing a day, he was gathered at the Handol Council, and he was in a flucing manner, and the defendant's temporary entertainment did not constitute a so-called "land white" of which two persons were 4,000 won a total of 4,000 won, and two persons were 4,000 won abrucing and play together with 4,000 won abrucing and playing together with flussssium 4,000 won abrut, and after considering the above circumstances and methods of flusing the defendant's four persons's experience, property level, methods, flusing relations, and flusium, the judgment that the defendant's temporary entertainment did not constitute an excessive so-called "public entertainment" of this case is justified.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Kim Jung-soo (Presiding Justice) and Lee Jong-young's Lee Jong-young

arrow