Defendant

A Imprisonment for one year and each of the defendants B shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months.

However, this decision is delivered to the Defendants.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A on March 11, 2016, the Seoul Southern District Court has been sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year for a violation of the Game Industry Promotion Act.

Defendant

B is an Internet computer game facility provider that operates "D" in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and the defendant A is an employee of the above PC bank.

No one shall provide the contents of a game product for the distribution or use, the contents of which are different from the contents classified by the Game Management Committee, or display or keep the game for such purpose, and for game products classified by the Game Management Committee, he/she shall directly create opdy, and for game products suitable for vava and vava, he/she directly produces opdy, and directly charge them in the game by himself/herself in an online manner, and purchase baba and game money and purchase them.

Nevertheless, the Defendants offered six computer units to provide customers with service by separately setting up a manager page different from the rating received from the Game Management Committee, from July 24, 2018 to May 21, 2019, and provided them for the use of modified game products, the contents of which are different from the rating received, by setting up six computer units in the above D, from around July 24, 2018 to around May 21, 2019, and managing the ID and passwords made by the Defendants in the manager page, and then, by managing the ID and passwords made by the Defendants in the manager page, the Defendants provided the relevant ID and password to the unspecified number of customers who found the relevant location, and received the price for filling from the customers through the manager page, and then, provided them for the use of the modified game products with a content different from the rating received.

As a result, Defendants conspired to violate the Game Industry Promotion Act.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. Each police interrogation protocol against the Defendants

1. E statements;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. The Game Products Management Committee as a result of appraisal;