The number of crimes of violation of Article 50 subparag. 1-2 and Article 21(1) of the Sound Records, Video Products and Game Products Act and crimes of gambling opening (=actual concurrence relationship)

Articles 37 and 40 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Defendant

Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2006No1521 Decided February 14, 2007

The appeal is dismissed.

The crime of violation of Article 50 subparag. 1-2 and Article 21(1) of the Sound Records, Video Products and Game Software Act and the crime of gambling opening and opening and opening are not deemed to be one act under the law. In addition, as a separate crime with different elements of each element, it is reasonable to view the two crimes as substantive concurrent relations, since each of the different legal interests exists. The judgment below to the same effect is just and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the number of

In addition, in this case where imprisonment for less than 10 years is sentenced, the argument that the court below's punishment is too excessive and thus the prior appeal is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Park Ill-sook (Presiding Justice)