logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2014.08.08 2014노434
게임산업진흥에관한법률위반
Text

All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor against Defendant B are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the overall circumstances of the Defendants, the sentence imposed by the lower court (for the Defendants, 10 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended execution, 200 hours of community service, etc.) is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the overall circumstances of this case, the sentence imposed by the court below on Defendant B is too unfasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Although there are favorable circumstances, such as the fact that Defendant A recognized the instant crime, and there is no criminal history against the Defendant. However, the type of crime, such as the violation of the Game Industry Promotion Act, is likely to cause harm to the society by encouraging excessive speculative spirit to the general public, and is not eradicated even continuous control, and thus, there is a need to strictly punish such crime. The Defendant continues illegal money exchange business by installing a separate game machine at the same place without suspending business, even though it has been controlled once by illegal money exchange business as stated in paragraph (1) of the judgment of the court below, and all other circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, living environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., are considered to be unfair.

B. We also examine the Defendant B and the Prosecutor’s assertion.

Although the defendant recognizes the crime of this case as late as possible, there are favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the period during which the defendant was involved in the money exchange business of the game of this case, and the fact that the profit acquired by the defendant is not clearly revealed due to the crime of this case, the crime of this case, such as the fact that the defendant is subject to a fine for the same kind of crime, and the crime of violation of the Act on the Promotion of Game Industry, such as the violation of the Game Industry Promotion, is encouraging excessive speculative spirit to the general public, and thus, is not eradicated even the continuous control.

arrow