Defendant

A Imprisonment for 8 months and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of 2,00,000 won.

Defendant

B The above fine.

Criminal facts

Defendant

A is a business proprietor of the "F" game room located in Ulsan Dong-gu E and the second floor, and the defendant B is an employee of the above game room that conducts money exchange and customers' heart.

No business shall arrange the exchange or exchange of tangible and intangible results obtained through the use of game products as a business.

From the beginning of March 2016 to July 2, 2016, the Defendants installed 60 game machine in total, including the above game site, 40 game machine, and 20 game machine, “space transfer box,” and “new posters hand,” and, if an unspecified customer requests to refund the game score obtained by inserting cash in the above game machine, the Defendants exchanged the game score by settling the game score as KRW 20,000 per 20 won on the basis of the perfect score to the customer.

As a result, Defendants conspired to exchange tangible and intangible results obtained through the use of game water for business purposes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each statement of G, H, I, J, K, and L;

1. Police seizure records;

1. Each report on internal investigation (the details of commencement of internal investigation), (the analysis of show videos), (the internal investigation of matters permitted for a game room, etc.), and (the statement of informant));

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report (field status, etc.), and (Investigation into the details of cash seizure in possession of employees B);

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts, Articles 44(1)2 and 32(1)7 of the Act on the Promotion of respective Game Industry, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, and Article 30 of the Criminal Act, and each selection of fines against Defendant A and Defendant B

1. Defendant B who is detained in a workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant A: Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant A who is an order to observe the protection: Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 48 (1) of the Criminal Act for forfeiture;

1. Defendant B: Defendant B’s assertion that Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is not a joint principal offender but a joint principal offender and should be assessed as a subordinate offender; according to each evidence of the judgment below, Defendant B is the only person of F.