beta
Text
The judgment below
The part on Defendant BE is reversed.
Defendant
The BE is not guilty. The defendant BE is not guilty.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant BD (unfair sentencing)’s sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant BE 1 had no intention to assist the game of this case because the game of this case was unaware of the degree of illegal game room.
2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (an amount of two million won) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Considering the circumstances asserted by the Defendant on the grounds of appeal, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable, even if there is no change in circumstances that may be considered in sentencing after the lower judgment’s determination on the grounds of appeal by Defendant BD, and the various conditions of sentencing specified in the records and arguments of this case are considered.
B. Determination as to the grounds for appeal by Defendant BE 1) Since aiding and abetting under the Criminal Act refers to an indirect act that facilitates the commission of a principal offender with the knowledge that the principal offender is committing a crime, the aiding and abetting offender should have the intention of the so-called aiding and abetting that the principal offender is aided and abetting the commission of the principal offender and the principal offender’s act that constitutes an act that satisfies
2) In light of the following circumstances, the lower court’s legal statement and the evidence presented by the prosecutor alone, which can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, was proven that the Defendant, while knowing that Defendant BD, etc. offered the game products that were not classified as class, was an employee in the game of this case, he was able to easily protect the game products and facilitate the use of the customers.
It is difficult to see it.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty on the charges is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
(1) The Defendant had consistently known the game of this case to the police.