Defendant 1 and four others

Newly Inserted by Act No. 1014, Dec. 1, 201>

Law Firm Cheongju et al.

Defendant 1 shall be punished by imprisonment for four years and six months, by imprisonment for Defendant 2, by imprisonment for one year and six months, by imprisonment for Defendant 3 (Defendant 2), by imprisonment for six years, by imprisonment for one year and by imprisonment for four years, and by imprisonment for five months, respectively.

However, for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive, the execution of each of the above punishment against Defendant 4 and Defendant 5 shall be suspended.

The seized Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office 2016Mo3752, 384 through 390, 406 through 414, 468, 474, 476, 480 through 485, and 986 shall be forfeited from Defendant 1, Defendant 3 of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office 2016Mo3752, 931, 945, 954, 987, 2016Mo3752, 77 through 79, 92 through 97, 116 through 119, 12 through 124, 126 through 128, 133 through 135, 143 through 168, and 9604, respectively.

Samsung Electronic HD TV (110 persons, UN 110S9AF) and the Home Czeer sets connected to the said TV in Goyang-si ( Address 1 omitted) shall be confiscated from Defendant 3.

With respect to Goyang-si ( Address 1 omitted), Defendant 4’s claim for the return of the deposit amount of KRW 300,000,000, which Defendant 4 held against Nonindicted 63 shall be forfeited from Defendant 4.

52,237,570,510 won from Defendant 1, 146,00,000 won from Defendant 2, and 316,135,830 won from Defendant 3, and 240,000,000 won from Defendant 4 shall be collected respectively.

[Attachment 2016 Highest 4625] - Defendant 1 and Defendant 2

No person, other than the Seoul Olympic Sports Promotion Foundation or an entrusted business entity, shall provide property or financial benefits (hereinafter referred to as "similar act") to a person who correctly predicted the sports betting tickets or similar things by issuing them, and no person shall open a place or space for gambling for profit.

1. Public offering relations and allocation of roles;

From February 2012, Nonindicted 1, in order with Defendant 3, Nonindicted 30, Nonindicted 33, Nonindicted 34, Nonindicted 35, Nonindicted 36, Nonindicted 37, Nonindicted 38, Nonindicted 12, Nonindicted 14, Nonindicted 31, Nonindicted 39, Nonindicted 40, Nonindicted 41, Nonindicted 42, Nonindicted 43, Nonindicted 44, Nonindicted 45, Nonindicted 7, Nonindicted 46, Nonindicted 6, Nonindicted 47, Nonindicted 9, Nonindicted 5, Nonindicted 48, Nonindicted 49, Nonindicted 50, and Nonindicted 19 (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant 3, etc.”) and the Defendants, concluded a separate public auction agreement with an overseas sports sports ticket site in which it is impossible to access in the Republic of Korea, and opened an overseas sports ticket (hereinafter referred to as “overseas sports ticket brokerage agreement”) and the head office (hereinafter referred to as “overseas sports ticket brokerage agreement”).

Accordingly, Nonindicted 1 plays a general role in managing the operation of the above relay site and the fund management; Defendant 3 took a role in creating, developing, and conducting other general planning; Nonindicted 30, and Nonindicted 33; entering into and maintaining a contract with the head office of an overseas website; Nonindicted 34, Nonindicted 35, and Nonindicted 36; Nonindicted 45, Nonindicted 7, Nonindicted 46, Nonindicted 6, and Nonindicted 47 play a role in developing, maintaining, and repairing programs of each relay site; Nonindicted 45, Nonindicted 46, and Nonindicted 47 play a role in filling and exchanging game money; Defendant 1, as a domestic total amount of money; Defendant 1 manages the gambling proceeds under Nonindicted 1’s order; Defendant 2 took a look at the invested place, such as purchasing domestic real estate and investment in Korea; Defendant 2 withdraws the gambling proceeds or delivers them to Nonindicted 1’s head office in the Republic of Korea; Defendant 1 took a role in distributing the proceeds from gambling; and Nonindicted 19, who remitted the proceeds to Nonindicted 1.

2. Specific criminal facts;

피고인들은 공소외 1 및 피고인 3 등과 위와 같이 순차적으로 공모하여 2012. 9. 주1) 경 부터(피고인들은 2013. 4.경부터 가담) 2015. 4. 22.경까지 필리핀 마닐라시 소재 상업중심지인 ■■■ 지역에 위치한 ‘◆◆◆ 빌딩’ 21층 및 ‘★★★ 빌딩’ 24층 VIP 룸 등에 컴퓨터와 인터넷 통신기기 등을 갖추어 놓고 ‘☆☆☆☆☆☆.com', '▽▽▽▽-▽▽▽.com' 등 도메인을 사용하여 16개 가량의 중계사이트를 개설, 운영하면서 불특정 다수의 내국인들을 회원으로 모집하고 회원들로 하여금 위 중계사이트를 통해 ‘○○○(영문표기 1 생략)’, ‘△△△(영문표기 2 생략)’에서 제공하는 야구, 축구, 농구 등 국내·외 각종 스포츠 경기의 승부에 베팅을 하게 하여 베팅이 적중할 경우 미리 정해진 비율에 따라 환전을 해주고, 적중되지 못하면 그 베팅금을 자신들이 취득하는 방법으로 중계사이트를 운영하여 같은 기간 중 별첨 CD 중 298 내지 564번 범죄일람표 기재와 같이 267개의 계좌를 통해 355,170,288,745원 상당의 도금을 입금받은 다음 181,244,883,430원을 회원들에게 환전해 주고, 173,925,405,315원 상당을 수익금으로 취득하였다[피고인들은 2013. 4.경부터 2015. 4. 22.경까지 별첨 CD 중 “범죄일람표 자금요약내역” 순번 194번 계좌부터 267번 계좌를 통해 주2) 119,227,208,035원 상당의 도금을 입금받은 다음 주3) 54,606,023,085원 을 회원들에게 환전하여 주고 주4) 64,621,184,950원 상당을 수익금으로 취득하였다].

Accordingly, the Defendants committed similar acts in collusion with Nonindicted 1 and Defendant 3, and set up a space for gambling for profit.

[Attachment 2016 Highest 4742] - Defendant 3, Defendant 4, Defendant 5

1. Defendant 3

(a) Violation of the National Sports Promotion Act (Gambling place, etc.), and opening of gambling space;

No person, other than the Seoul Olympic Sports Promotion Foundation or an entrusted business entity, shall issue sports betting tickets or similar things and provide property or financial benefits to persons who win at the betting, and no person shall establish a place or space for gambling for profit.

(1) public-private partnership relations and allocation of roles

From September 2012, Nonindicted 1, Defendant 1, Nonindicted 38, Nonindicted 30, Nonindicted 33, Nonindicted 34, Nonindicted 35, Nonindicted 36, Nonindicted 37, Nonindicted 12, Nonindicted 14, Nonindicted 39, Nonindicted 40, Nonindicted 41, Nonindicted 42, Nonindicted 43, Nonindicted 45, Nonindicted 7, Nonindicted 46, Nonindicted 6, Nonindicted 47, Nonindicted 9, Nonindicted 5, Nonindicted 48, Nonindicted 50, Nonindicted 19, and Defendant 2 (hereinafter referred to as “Nonindicted 1, etc.”), concluded a public auction on the overseas sports site that cannot be connected in Korea, and provided various overseas sports betting sites (hereinafter referred to as “overseas sports betting sites”) with a separate domestic sports ticket sales contract (hereinafter referred to as “foreign sports ticket sales business entity,” and omitted, ○○○ (Korean sports ticket sales business entity, etc.); and ○ (hereinafter referred to as “○”).

Accordingly, Nonindicted 1 and Nonindicted 33 play a general role in overall management of the operation of the above relay site and the fund management, and another general responsibility that oversees the planning of the members and profit-making structure, Defendant 1 and Defendant 1, as the general responsibility for domestic funds, managed gambling income under the order of the above Nonindicted 1, and in physical coloring the investment source, including the purchase of domestic real estate and the investment of corporations, etc., Defendant 38 and Nonindicted 30 and Nonindicted 33 play a role in investing and managing gambling income generated from overseas in connection with Defendant 1 in a foreign country as the financial branch of the Republic of Korea; Nonindicted 30 and Nonindicted 33 play a role in concluding and maintaining contracts with the head office overseas; Nonindicted 34; Nonindicted 35; Nonindicted 35; and Nonindicted 36 play a role in developing, maintaining, and repairing programs of each relay site; Nonindicted 45; Nonindicted 7; Nonindicted 46; Nonindicted 46; Nonindicted 47; Nonindicted 47, and exchange of game money in Korea; and Defendant 2 may withdraw or withdraw money money from the Republic of Korea.

2) Specific criminal facts

피고인은 위와 같은 공모 및 역할 분담에 따라 공소외 1 등과 함께 2012. 2.경부터 2015. 4. 22.경까지 필리핀 마닐라시 소재 상업중심지인 ■■■ 지역에 위치한 ‘◆◆◆ 빌딩’ 21층 및 ‘★★★ 빌딩’ 24층 VIP 룸 등에 컴퓨터와 인터넷 통신기기 등을 갖추어 놓고 ‘☆☆☆☆☆☆.com', '▽▽▽▽-▽▽▽.com' 등 도메인을 사용하여 16개가량의 중계사이트를 개설, 운영하면서 불특정 다수의 내국인들을 회원으로 모집하고 회원들로 하여금 위 중계사이트를 통해 위 ‘○○○(영문표기 1 생략)’, ‘△△△(영문표기 2 생략)’에서 제공하는 야구, 축구, 농구 등 국내·외 각종 스포츠 경기의 승부에 베팅을 하게 하여 베팅이 적중할 경우 미리 정해진 비율에 따라 환전을 해주고, 적중되지 못하면 그 베팅금을 자신들이 취득하는 방법으로 중계사이트를 운영하여 별첨 CD 중 298 내지 564번 범죄일람표 기재와 같이 같은 기간 중 267개의 계좌를 통해 355,170,288,745원 상당의 도금을 입금받은 다음 181,244,833,430원을 회원들에게 환전해 주고, 173,925,405,315원 상당을 수익금으로 취득하였다.

Accordingly, the Defendant committed similar acts in collusion with Nonindicted Party 1, and set up a space for gambling for profit.

(b) Violation of the National Sports Promotion Act (Gambling, etc.) and habitual gambling;

No person shall gamble by using any similar act.

Nevertheless, around November 2009, the Defendant visited the Internet private sports territory site opened by a non-operator of a computer at the Posido, which was located at the Posisidong of Posido, carried out gambling in a way that money was collected or lost depending on the result of various sports games, such as domestic and foreign axiss, camping districts, farming districts, and fishing districts provided at home and abroad, and from that time up to September 2012, the Defendant got approximately KRW 500 million by accessing approximately 500 private sports territory sites in the same way.

As a result, the defendant gambling by using similar acts at the same time, and habitually gambling.

(c) A teacher in violation of the Use and Protection of Credit Information Act;

No one, other than a credit information company, etc., shall engage in business to find out a certain person's whereabouts and contact details or investigate his/her private life, other than commercial transaction relationships, including financial transactions

In operating the relay site like Paragraph (a), the Defendant offered a business to access the victim Nonindicted 4, who is an overseas pre-paid card business operator, to store friendship and to contact the pre-paid card on the above relay site. However, the Defendant was refused from the victim, and the Defendant was willing to call an unauthorized credit information business operator to request the victim to investigate his/her privacy, etc. in order to achieve his/her intent by putting the weak points of the victim.

피고인은 2014. 5. 말경 고양시 (주소 2 생략)에서 금융위원회의 허가를 받지 아니한 채 ‘◀◀◀◀◀◀’라는 상호로 사람찾기, 가정문제 해결, 신변보호, 역할대행 등을 주요업무로 하는 무허가 신용정보업체 운영자 공소외 3에게 “피해자의 주거지 등 사생활을 뒷조사 해달라”고 의뢰하면서 대금으로 1일 150만 원씩 합계 4,000만 원을 교부하였다.

Accordingly, Nonindicted 3, along with his employee Nonindicted 51 and Nonindicted 52, found the residence of the victim and his family members or took pictures and videos related to their privacy in the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Young-si, and Jeonnam-si by means of driving or observing lockedly the victim and his family members from the Seoul Metropolitan City, Yeongdeungpo-si, and Jeonnam-si.

Accordingly, the Defendant instigated the operation of the unauthorized Credit Information Company by Nonindicted 3, etc.

2. Defendant 4

As Defendant 3’s wife, the Defendant knew that Defendant 3 acquired criminal proceeds by operating the instant transit site in the same manner as indicated in paragraph (1) and received criminal proceeds equivalent to KRW 1,191,075,070 in total from February 2, 2012 to May 2016, the Defendant received from Defendant 3 the criminal proceeds of KRW 200 million (vehicle registration number 6 omitted) as indicated in attached Table 2, from around June 13, 2014.

3. Defendant 5

On April 5, 2016, the Defendant, along with Nonindicted 64, accepted it upon the Defendant’s request from Nonindicted 3, upon knowing that it was in flight due to Defendant 3’s receipt and distribution of Nonindicted 1’s suspicions that Defendant 3 operated a transit site, such as that it was in flight.

이에 피고인은 2016. 4. 6.부터 같은 달 17일경까지 고양시 일산동구 태극로 소재 ‘♠♠호텔 고양점’ ♥♥♥♥호, 서울 서대문구 연희로 소재 ‘♣♣♣호텔’ ♧♧♧호, 서울 강남구 테헤란로 소재 ‘◐◐◐◐호텔’ ◈◈◈◈호 등 숙소를 자신 또는 지인의 명의로 예약한 뒤 피고인 3에게 거처로 제공하고, 같은 달 18일경 공소외 64의 신혼집으로 임차해 둔 경기 고양시 (주소 4 생략)에 피고인 3과 그의 처 피고인 4를 머물게 하는 한편, 공소외 64로 하여금 피고인 3의 생필품조달, 운전, 심부름 등 수발을 들게 하는 등 편의를 제공하고, 2016. 6. 29. 14:00경 수사기관의 추적을 낌새 챈 피고인 3으로부터 “문제가 생겼으니 당분간 지방을 돌아야겠다”는 연락을 받고 피고인 3의 지시로 서울 동대문구 소재 환전소에서 도피자금 1억 원을 수령한 뒤, 자신의 (차량등록번호 7 생략) 아우디 A8 차량에 피고인 3을 태워 부산방면으로 도피시켰다.

Accordingly, the Defendant conspiredd with Nonindicted 64 to conceal or escape a person who commits a crime punishable by a fine or heavier punishment, even though he was aware that the Defendant committed such crime.

[No. 3 of the Decision 2016 Highest 4742]

1. The legal statement of the defendant 5

1. Each prosecutor's protocol of examination of the suspect against Defendants 3, 4, and 5

[The remaining criminal facts except for the three points and habituality in the Decision 2017 Highest 4742]

1. The respective legal statements of Defendant 1, Defendant 2, and Defendant 4

1. Part of Defendant 3’s legal statement (as to the first-A of the Decision No. 2016 Highest 4742), and legal statement (as to the first-B, C of the Decision No. 2016 Highest 4742)

1. Each prosecutor's protocol of interrogation of the suspect against Defendants 1, 2, 3, and 4

1. Each police interrogation protocol on Defendants 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6, Nonindicted 48, Nonindicted 5, Nonindicted 31, Nonindicted 50, Nonindicted 9, Nonindicted 19, Nonindicted 55, Nonindicted 34, Nonindicted 8, Nonindicted 43, Nonindicted 42, Nonindicted 44, Nonindicted 56, and Nonindicted 11

1. The statement of each police statement on Nonindicted 57, Nonindicted 58, Nonindicted 59, Nonindicted 60, Nonindicted 9, Nonindicted 24, Nonindicted 61, Nonindicted 62, and Nonindicted 56

1. A statement prepared by Nonindicted 7

1. Statement of seizure of each police;

1. Each investigation report;

【Habituality】

In light of the fact that Defendant 3 repeatedly committed the instant gambling crime for a period of up to three years, and that the proceeds therefrom exceed KRW 500 million, etc., Defendant 3 may be recognized as a habitive wall.

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Defendant 1 and Defendant 2: Articles 247 and 30 ( comprehensively including the establishment of gambling spaces) of the Criminal Act; Articles 47 Subparag. 2 and 26(1) of the National Sports Promotion Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act

Defendant 3: Articles 247, 30 (a inclusive of opening a gambling space), 47 subparag. 2, 26(1), 30 (a) of the National Sports Promotion Act, Article 48 subparag. 3, and 26(1) of the National Sports Promotion Act ( comprehensively including similar acts), Article 246(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act ( comprehensively including gambling and gambling), Article 246(2) of the former Use and Protection of Credit Information Act (amended by Act No. 13216, Mar. 11, 2015); Article 50(2)7, and Article 40 subparag. 4 of the former Use and Protection of Credit Information Act (amended by Act No. 13216, Mar. 11, 2015); Article 31(1) of the Criminal Act (a)

Defendant 4: Article 4 (General Supervision of Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment)

Defendant 5: Articles 151(1) and 30(Article 151(1) and 30(Article 151(1) of the Criminal Act inclusive)

[The transit site of this case is a place where domestic users can enjoy sports betting through links, such as △△△△, ○○○, etc., which is a foreign sports-related site. If domestic users who join the transit site of this case deposit money in the domestic account opened in the transit site of this case, the above foreign sports-related site is charged with each of the above foreign sports-related betting sites through the above website, and if users want to receive the betting money and the result of the betting on the sports-related site of this case are recorded, it is a place where the users are paid money equivalent to the foreign sports-related money to the foreign users' accounts, and it is not a place where the foreign users can receive the above domestic sports-related intermediary money from the above domestic sports-related users to the above domestic sports-related users (this refers to the domestic sports-related intermediary of the above foreign sports-related site, which is not an operator of the sports-related tickets of this case.)

1. Formal concurrence (Defendant 3);

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (Offences of violating the National Sports Promotion Act due to Gambling by Using Similar Acts and Habitual Gambling)

1. Selection of punishment;

Each Imprisonment Selection

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes (defendants 1, 2, and 3);

Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Code

1. Suspension of execution (defendants 4 and 5);

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Code (The following circumstances considered as favorable among the reasons for sentencing)

1. Confiscation (defendants 1, 3, and 4);

Article 8(1)1 and 2 of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment

1. Collection (defendants 1, 2, 3, and 4);

Articles 10(1) and 8(1) of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment

(2) The defendant 1, the defendant 3, and the defendant 4 shall additionally collect the remaining criminal proceeds after deducting the above value of the articles confiscated.

1. Sentencing criteria;

A. Defendant 3

【Scope of Recommendation】

Illegal Sports Gambling, etc.> Type 3 (Similar Sports Land) : Special Dance Area (1 to 6 years)

【Special Person under Guard】

Where a large number of persons have committed a crime systematically by sharing their roles, and where they are led to planning or implementation of the crime or play a key role, and where the amount of profit or business from the crime is very large.

【Disposition of Multiple Crimes】

Since crimes for which the sentencing criteria are not set are concurrent, compliance with the lower limit of the scope of the recommended sentence of the above sentencing criteria shall be observed.

B. Defendant 1

【Scope of Recommendation】

Illegal Sports Gambling, etc.> Type 3 (Similar Sports Land) Aggravated Area (1 year to 4 years)

[Special Mitigation (Aggravated Aggravation)]

Where a person commits a crime in an organized manner by sharing the roles of the self-denunciation or internal accusation / Where he/she leads to the planning or implementation of the crime or plays a key role in the crime, and the scale of profit or business from the crime is very large.

C. Defendant 2

【Scope of Recommendation】

Illegal Sports Gambling, etc.> Type 3 (Similar Sports Land) Aggravated Area (1 year to 4 years)

[Special Mitigation (Aggravated Aggravation)]

A self-denunciation or internal accusation / Where revenue or business from a crime is very large;

2. Determination of sentence;

A. Defendants 1, 2, and 3

(i) common matters;

The crime of this case committed by the above defendants is highly likely to cause the amount of betting and the amount of profits from the crime to a astronomical figure, and the period of time is very long. The above defendants installed servers, etc. in a foreign country where the domestic judicial power does not reach the above defendants, and committed the crime systematically by sharing their roles among them. The crime of this case is likely to cause social harm by encouraging the gambling spirit of the people and hindering sound labor consciousness, etc., and is likely to have a negative impact on the national economy by allocating national resources to an inefficiency field.

2) Defendant 3

Defendant 3, as a general book planned to commit the crime of this case, planned or executed the crime of this case in a leading way, other than that, a large amount of habitual gambling; when an investigation by an investigative agency was conducted, the escape was committed and the arrest was made only for one year after the escape; on the other hand, the defendant recognized his mistake as a substitute; the defendant has no record of criminal punishment; the defendant has no record of criminal punishment; and other sentencing conditions such as the defendant’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment; the motive, means and consequence of the crime; and the circumstances after the crime, etc. shall be determined as ordered by the order.

3) Defendant 1

Defendant 1 is in charge of the key role of managing gambling earnings as a domestic total amount of money, etc. When an investigation by an investigative agency is excessive, the escape to a foreign country and the second month later, and the defendant seems to have been aware of and against his mistake. On the other hand, the defendant seems to have no record of criminal punishment, and the defendant has no record of criminal punishment, and the punishment shall be determined as ordered by taking into account the sentencing conditions such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime.

3) Defendant 2

Defendant 2, as a domestic measure to withdraw from the crime of this case, has played a significant role in the crime of this case, when an investigation by an investigative agency has become excessive, voluntarily surrenders to only two months after the escape, and on the other hand, it appears that the defendant recognized his mistake and against himself, there is no record of criminal punishment, and other factors of sentencing such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the punishment shall be determined as ordered by the order, taking into account the following factors:

B. Defendant 4

A large amount of criminal proceeds received by the defendant exceeds one billion won, the defendant is also arrested, and the defendant seems to have been aware of and against his/her mistake, the defendant has no record of punishment more than imprisonment without prison labor, and the defendant has received the above criminal proceeds from the defendant 3, who is his/her spouse, and there are no points to be considered in the motive of punishment. Other factors such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc. are considered.

C. Defendant 5

The punishment as ordered shall be determined by taking into consideration the following factors: (a) the defendant concealed and allowed the defendant 3 to flee with regard to the crime of the defendant 3, etc.; (b) the nature of the crime is not good; (c) the defendant seems to recognize and reflect his mistake; (d) the defendant has no record of criminal punishment; (c) the defendant has no other history of criminal punishment; (d) the defendant's age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment; (e) motives, means

1. Summary of Defendant 3’s violation of the National Sports Promotion Act (Gambling, etc.) among the facts charged in the instant case

피고인은 공소외 1 등과 함께 2012. 2.경부터 2015. 4. 22.경까지 필리핀 마닐라시 소재 상업중심지인 ■■■ 지역에 위치한 ‘◆◆◆ 빌딩’ 21층 및 ‘★★★ 빌딩’ 24층 VIP 룸 등에 컴퓨터와 인터넷 통신기기 등을 갖추어 놓고 ‘☆☆☆☆☆☆.com', '▽▽▽▽-▽▽▽.com' 등 도메인을 사용하여 16개 가량의 중계사이트를 개설, 운영하면서 불특정 다수의 내국인들을 회원으로 모집하고 회원들로 하여금 위 중계사이트를 통해 위 ‘○○○(영문표기 1 생략)’, ‘△△△(영문표기 2 생략)’에서 제공하는 야구, 축구, 농구 등 국내·외 각종 스포츠 경기의 승부에 베팅을 하게 하여 베팅이 적중할 경우 미리 정해진 비율에 따라 환전을 해주고, 적중되지 못하면 그 베팅금을 자신들이 취득하는 방법으로 중계사이트를 운영하여 별첨 CD 중 1 내지 564번 범죄일람표 기재와 같이 같은 기간 564개의 계좌를 통해 670,918,463,859원 상당의 도금을 입금받은 다음 384,309,271,917원을 회원들에게 환전해 주고, 286,609,191,942원 상당을 수익금으로 취득하였다.

Accordingly, the defendant committed a similar act in collusion with the non-indicted 1.

2. Defendant 3 and his defense counsel’s assertion

Defendant 3, along with Nonindicted Party 1, was involved in the operation of the instant relay site from October 2012.

3. Determination

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the time when Defendant 3 entered into an agreement with Nonindicted 1, etc., and set up a server, etc. in a foreign country and operated the relay site of this case can be recognized as around September 2012 (However, the date is not specified).

한편 공소외 19가 2012. 2.경 ‘▣▣머니’라고 하는 환전업체를 운영하고 있었는데 피고인 3이 ‘▣▣머니’에 고객을 유치하여 주거나 이용할 수 있는 계좌를 제공하여 주고 수수료를 받은 사실은 자인하고 있다.

‘▣▣머니'는 원화를 호주 달러로 환전한 후 해외 인터넷 사이트에서 거래가 가능한 머니부커스 등 온라인 페이먼트 또는 전자지갑 업체의 계좌로 송금하여 주는 역할을 하는 온라인 환전업체인 점, ‘▣▣머니’를 이용하는 고객은 ‘▣▣머니’를 통하여 환전한 돈을 머니부커스에 개설한 자신의 계좌에 입금받은 후 이를 이베이, 아마존 등 해외 인터넷 쇼핑몰에서 사용할 수도 있고, 해외 유명 스포츠토토 베팅 사이트에서 사용할 수도 있는 점, 국내 이용자가 머니부커스로 해외 스포츠토토 베팅 사이트를 이용하기 위해서는 머니부커스에 계정을 만들고, 해외 스포츠토토 베팅 사이트에 회원 가입을 하면서 결제 수단으로 머니북커스를 선택하여 머니북커스의 계정을 입력한 다음 ‘충전하기’ 란에서 머니북커스를 선택하고 금액을 적고 충전 버튼을 클릭하면 머니북커스와 해외 스포츠토토 베팅 사이트가 연동되어 자동으로 머니북커스 계정에 있는 외환이 위 베팅 사이트로 입금되어 충전되어 그 게임 머니를 이용하여 베팅을 하고 환전은 그 역방향으로 진행되는 것인 점, 이때 ‘▣▣머니'는 환전에 따른 수수료를 부과하여 수익을 창출하는 구조인 점, 별첨 CD 범죄일람표 계좌들 중 일부는 위와 같은 ‘▣▣머니’ 운영에 관련된 것인 점(공소외 19 등은 ‘▣▣머니’를 2013. 7.경까지 운영하였다고 진술하고 주6) 있다) 등에 비추어 보면 피고인 3이 ‘▣▣머니’에 관여한 행위를 이 부분 공소사실 기재와 같은 유사행위를 한 것으로 평가할 수는 없다고 할 것이다.

결국 이 부분 공소사실 중 이 사건 중계사이트를 운영하기 이전 기간인 2009. 10. 1. 이전에 거래가 시작된 별첨 CD 1 내지 297번 범죄일람표 기재 부분은 범죄사실의 증명이 없는 때에 해당하여 형사소송법 제325조 후단에 의하여 무죄를 선고하여야 하나( 피고인 3이 이 사건 중계사이트를 운영한 시점이 2009. 9.경임은 분명하지만 그 일자가 특정이 되지 않아 거래시작 시점이 2009. 10. 1. 이전 부분은 그 거래 내용이 이 사건 중계사이트를 이용한 것과 관련된 것인지 아니면 ‘▣▣머니’를 이용한 것과 관련된 것인지를 알 수 없고, 이 중에는 거래종료 시점이 2009. 10. 1. 이후인 부분도 포함되어 있기는 하지만 그 거래 내용이 거래시작 시점이 2009. 10. 1. 이전인 계좌의 거래내역 인 점에 비추어 보면, 그 거래 내용이 이 사건 중계사이트를 이용한 것과 관련된 것인지 아니면 ‘▣▣머니’를 이용한 것과 관련된 것인지를 알 수 없으므로 이 중 거래종료 시점이 2009. 10. 1. 이후인 거래 내용에 대해서도 역시 모두 범죄사실의 증명이 없다고 할 것이다) 이와 포괄일죄 관계에 있는 판시 국민체육진흥법위반(도박개장등)죄를 유죄로 인정한 이상 따로 주문에서 무죄를 선고하지 않기로 한다.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

[Attachment]

Judges B. For judges

(1) Although the changed facts charged are considered as “as of February 2012,” Defendant 3’s operation of the instant relay site with Nonindicted Party 1, etc. from around September 2012, as seen in the part regarding Defendant 3, Defendant 3 recognized as “as of September 2012” (the point at which Defendant 1 and Defendant 2 was prosecuted from around April 2013).

Note 2) Although the revised facts charged are indicated as “355,170,288,745 won”, “119,227,208,035 won” is correct for calculation.

Note 3) Although the revised facts charged are indicated as “181,244,883,430 won”, “54,606,023,085 won” is correct for calculation.

Note 4) Although the revised facts charged are indicated as “173,925,405,315 won”, “64,621,184,950 won” is correct for calculation.

Note 5) The indictment is written as “Article 50(3)3,” but it appears to be a clerical error.

주6) 공소외 19는 2013. 4.경까지 운영하였다고 진술하고 있고, 공소외 19 밑에서 ‘▣▣머니’를 운영하던 공소외 65는 2013. 7.경까지 운영하였다고 진술하고 있다.