logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2014.12.16 2014고단5625
사행행위등규제및처벌특례법위반등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

From April 29, 2014 to May 00:30 to May 3, 2014, the Defendant installed 38 game rooms in Daegu-gu B 2, Daegu-gu, and had multiple customers, such as C, put 10,00 won into the game machine, and had them enter 10,00 won in the game machine, and exchange 9,000 won after deducting 10% from commission, if the points obtained by customers are displayed on the game machine screen.

As a result, the Defendant, using a machine that is likely to attract speculative spirit in the above manner, was engaged in the business of taking speculative acts that cause property gains or losses to the users and exchanging game results according to the incidental outcome, and provided the game products that have not been classified to the customers for their use.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement concerning D, E, F, C, and G;

1. Suppression photographs;

1. Seizure records;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes response as a result of appraisal;

1. Article 30 (1) 1 of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, etc. concerning criminal facts, and Articles 44 (1) 2 and 32 (1) 1 and 7 of the Game Industry Promotion Act;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act to increase concurrent crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. Social service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 44(2) of the Act on the Promotion of Confiscation Industry and Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act is that the defendant provided game products with contents that are not classified, in order to encourage speculative activities and exchange and exchange the result of such speculative activities, thereby hindering the citizens' sound sense of work, and the nature of such crime is not somewhat weak.

arrow