Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of 12,00,000 won, Defendant B and C by a fine of 3,000,000 won.

The Defendants respectively.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is a person who interchanges an item card generated from a game, and Defendant B and C are exchange employees employed by Defendant D.

From March 20 to April 3, 2012, from around March 20, 2012 to April 3, 2012, the Defendants conspired to engage in an act of exchanging the results obtained through the use of game products by giving the items card acquired by customers at the nearby G entertainment room within the Ftra XG straw in the line with the Defendant C’s 4,50 won per head.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. The police statement of H;

1. A written statement of I and J;

1. Police seizure records;

1. Report on detection (Violation of the Game Industry Promotion Act) and application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (for real-time refund business operators), and investigation reports;

1. Article 44 (1) 2 and Article 32 (1) 7 of the Act on the Selection of and Promotion of the Game Industry, Article 30 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

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

1. Confiscation (Defendant A) Article 44 (2) of the Game Industry Promotion Act, Article 48 (1) 2 of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is that the item card can be used only for a specific game machine and that the main source of revenue in an illegal game room can be exchanged. As such, the fact that the Defendants in collusion with the game room business owner has a high possibility of exchanging the item card, the Defendants committed an offense while clearly recognizing illegality, and the fact that if the money exchange is not strictly punished, the eradication of the illegal game room is required to be eradicated, and that there is a need to deprive the Defendants of profits related to the illegal game room is disadvantageous to the Defendants

On the other hand, Defendant A is currently engaged in normal occupation and supporting his family, and Defendant B and C is an employee in favor of the Defendants.

In full view of the above points, the sentence is pronounced as ordered.