Of the judgment of the court below of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance, the part against Defendant A and the judgment of the court of second instance against Defendant AM.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

A misunderstanding of facts (as to Article 1-2 of the Criminal Act in the judgment of the court of first instance), Defendant A is a person who is merely a branch office for the game room listed in Article 1-2 (b) of the Criminal Act in the judgment of the court of first instance (the second floor of the Daejeon Dong-gu building, the second floor of the building; hereinafter “instant game room”), and the actual business owner is called “BT E”.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that found Defendant A guilty of this part of the facts charged that Defendant A operated the game room as the actual owner of the game room is erroneous and has affected the conclusion of the judgment.

The sentence of unfair sentencing (the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year, 6 months, and 4 months) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

Defendant

The AJ misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles did not require the defendant A to make a false statement as if he was an actual business owner.

Even if so, the fact that Defendant A made a false statement cannot be said to have reached the extent that the investigation agency is difficult or impossible to find or arrest the actual owner of the business, and thus, Defendant A does not constitute a crime of escape against a criminal.

On the premise of this, the crime of aiding and abetting criminal escape against Defendant AJ is not established.

Nevertheless, the court below's judgment that found the above defendant guilty of the crime of aiding and abetting the criminal defendant was erroneous or erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

The sentence of unfair sentencing (10 months of imprisonment) by the court below is too unreasonable.

Defendant

AM, NN, and AO's sentence (for defendant AM: imprisonment of 8 months; fine of 1.5 million won for defendant AO: fine of 1.5 million won; fine of 3 million won for defendant AO) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

Defendant

The judgment of the court of the trial on the judgment of the court of appeal against A was decided to consolidate each appeal case of the judgment of the court below against the defendant A.

The judgment of the court below and the second.