logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2013.09.10 2013고정610
풍속영업의규제에관한법률위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who operates a non-reported custom business with the trade name of D in Si interesting City C.

No person who conducts the amusement business affecting the public morals shall allow to view or peruse obscene documents, drawings, movies, records, video products, or other obscene materials.

Nevertheless, at around 15:30 on December 10, 2012, the Defendant kept a computer with obscene site immediately on the screen on the basis of the foregoing D 2, and received user fees of 6,000 won per hour from many unspecified customers who find the Dong office, and made them see foreign tourist, thereby allowing a person operating an amusement business affecting the public morals to view and peruse obscene videos at a place where the business affecting the public morals is conducted.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the police interrogation of the accused;

1. Each statement of E and F;

1. Seizure records;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing field photographs;

1. Article 10 (2) and subparagraph 3 of Article 3 of the Act on the Regulation of Businesses Affecting Public Morals Affecting Punishment for Crimes, and Articles 10 (2) and 3 of the same Act;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act to be confiscated;

1. Determination as to the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The summary of the argument is that customers create the product, and the defendant is not in the position of the guarantor to remove the product, and the defendant's act is not subject to punishment.

2. According to the evidence of the inspection of the determination submission, the defendant was aware of the fact that the above Amcom was generated on the screen on the basis of two computers, and the customer was allowed to view the above Amcom by accessing the above Amcom to the site where obscene video is located without a special procedure.

Thus, the defendant, who runs the amusement business affecting the public morals in accordance with the above applicable provisions, should at least be aware of the existence of the above AD.

arrow