beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part against Defendant C shall be reversed.
Defendant
C A person shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
, however, the defendant.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. 1) In order to establish the crime of opening a gambling place for Defendant B (the part concerning the establishment of gambling place as stated in paragraph (1) of the crime of the lower judgment) (the part concerning the establishment of gambling place as indicated in the lower judgment), the purpose of profit-making and the position of the presiding official is necessary.
In this regard, Defendant B had been able to establish and operate the above gambling place by lending KRW 10 million to Defendant A, who opened and operated the gambling place specified in this part of the facts charged (hereinafter “the instant gambling place”), and lending KRW 1 million or KRW 2 million with the operating fund of the above gambling place several times. However, Defendant B was not directly involved in preparing for or operating the above gambling place, and there was no fact that Defendant B was distributed the proceeds of operating the above gambling place (in other words, Defendant B was merely an aiding and abetting crime of opening the gambling place, not for profit-making purposes). The lower court concluded that Defendant B constituted a principal offender of the crime of opening the gambling place. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the establishment of the above gambling place or by misapprehending the legal principles as to the crime of gambling, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2) According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, which was found not guilty of Defendant B’s offering of a bribe at the lower court, the lower court, despite the fact that Defendant B could be recognized as a bribe, on the grounds that, in light of the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence in its holding, the above five million won was merely the repayment by Defendant B on behalf of “the Defendant A’s obligation to borrow a loan amount of five million won against Defendant D,” and that there is no other evidence sufficient to acknowledge that the above five million won was a bribe.