The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of four million won.

The defendant does not pay the above fine.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal 1) Fact-misunderstanding and misunderstanding of the legal principles (not guilty part of the judgment below) (hereinafter “the game of this case”) are game products classified by free charging method with the limit, and the Defendant, even though the game was classified by free charging method, was charged with the game money within the game in return for money by the Defendant, and thus, the Defendant provided the game products that are different from the game products classified by the rating.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (2.5 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. The subject of the rating classification under the Act on the Promotion of Game Industry (hereinafter “Game Industry Act”) as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is the content of the game product, i.e., the game product, which is not the game product or program content itself, and the description of the game product content attached thereto.

Therefore, the act of providing game products for use different from the contents of the rating under Article 32(1)2 of the Game Industry Act includes not only the act of changing the contents of the application and the explanation attached thereto, but also the act of adding the important functions not stated in the above application or explanation.

Meanwhile, in light of the contents and legislative intent of Article 21(1) and (5), Article 32(1)2 and Article 45 subparag. 4 of the Game Industry Act, and Article 9-2(2) and (3) of the Enforcement Rule of the Game Industry Act, not only the contents of the game itself, but also the act of providing a game product for use after classifying the method of operating the game product closely related to the realization of the contents of the game product, but also the act of providing a game product for use by changing the contents different from those stated in the relevant game product description attached thereto, shall be deemed to constitute “act of providing a game product for use different from the contents of the game product.”