logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2017.11.14 2017도13140
국민체육진흥법위반(도박개장등)등
Text

The judgment below

The part against the Defendants is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Seoul Central District Court.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment as to the establishment of gambling space by the Defendants in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court is justifiable to have found the Defendants guilty of opening gambling space (excluding the part of not guilty of Defendant C’s grounds) among the facts charged against the Defendants.

In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending the legal principles on the crime of opening gambling spaces.

2. As to the Defendants’ violation of the National Sports Promotion Act (replacement, etc. of gambling)

A. Article 26(1) of the National Sports Promotion Act provides property or financial benefits (hereinafter “similar act”) to a person who correctly predicted the outcome by issuing sports promotion voting rights or things similar thereto (including the issuance through an information and communications network) to the Seoul Olympic Sports Promotion Foundation and a person who is not an entrusted business entity.

Article 47 subparagraph 2 of the same Act provides that a person who violates this Act shall be punished.

In order to introduce a business that issues sports promotion voting rights, the prohibition of “a similar act” and the penal provision were newly established along with the provision that “the Seoul Olympic Sports Promotion Act may carry on a business that issues sports promotion voting rights,” as amended by Act No. 6013 on August 31, 199.”

In full view of the content of the provision of the National Sports Promotion Act, the prohibition of “a similar act,” the background leading up to the establishment of a new provision of a punishment provision, and the legislative intent of the National Sports Promotion Act, etc., it can be deemed as constituting “a similar act” under Article 26(1) of the National Sports Promotion Act, which is similar to that of issuing sports promotion voting rights based on the National Sports Promotion Act, to “a person who issues sports promotion voting rights or any similar things, and provides property or property benefits to a person who correctly

Unlike this, sports promotion voting rights or similar.

arrow