Defendant

Defendant

Suspension Order (Court of Second Instance), Maternity (Court of Second Instance)

Law Firm Professor-ro, Attorneys Park Han-young et al.

Changwon District Court Decision 2012Ma138 Decided February 17, 2012

The part of the judgment of the court below against the defendant is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and three months.

The defendant is not guilty of violation of the Game Industry Promotion Act among the facts charged in this case.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

1) misunderstanding of facts as to violation of Information and Communications Network Utilization Promotion Act

Although there was a fact that the Defendant used the malicious program disseminated by Nonindicted Party 1, the Defendant did not spread, purchase, or produce the malicious program in collusion with Nonindicted Party 1, but the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) misunderstanding of legal principles as to violation of the Game Industry Promotion Act

Article 44(1)2 and Article 32(1)7 of the Game Industry Promotion Act are not a provision that punishs a person who realizes a game result through the exchange. Thus, the defendant's act of taking game money acquired by using a malicious program over to "game money" and remitting cash in return does not constitute "act of making a business of exchanging game products" which is punished in Articles 44(1)2 and 32(1)7 of the Game Industry Promotion Act, but the court below convicted the defendant of this part of the charges. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the above provision, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Unreasonable sentencing

In light of the fact that the defendant is in a position to support his family, that the defendant has no record of being punished for the same kind of crime, and that he is against his gender, the punishment imposed by the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment, additional collection 24,504,60 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Ex officio determination

Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant was made ex officio, the Prosecutor applied for changes in the indictment of violation of the Act on Promotion, etc. of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. (Violation of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Network Utilization, etc.) among the facts charged in the instant case as stated in paragraph (2). Since this Court permitted this, the part of the judgment of the court below against the Defendant cannot be maintained any further

B. Judgment on the defendant's misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

1) As to violation of Information and Communications Network Utilization Promotion Act

원심이 적법하게 채택하여 조사한 증거들에다 증인 공소외 1, 2의 당심 법정에서의 각 일부 진술을 보태어 인정할 수 있는 다음과 같은 사정들 즉, ① 피고인은 수사기관 및 당심 법정에서 “2010년 여름경 공소외 1로부터 ‘다른 사람의 패를 보면서 게임을 할 수 있는 프로그램이 있는데, 한번 같이 해보겠느냐. 내가 프로그램을 유포할테니, 네가 ♡♡♡을 해서 게임머니를 팔아 같이 돈을 벌자.’라는 취지의 제안을 받고 이에 동의하였다.”라는 취지로 진술하고 있고, 증인 공소외 1도 수사기관 및 당심 법정에서 이에 부합하는 진술을 하고 있는 점, ② 피고인은 공소외 1이 유포한 악성프로그램에 감염된 컴퓨터 사용자의 정보를 이용하여 인터넷 상대방의 패를 보는 방법으로 ♡♡♡을 하면서 부정하게 취득한 게임 머니를 현금화하였고, 공소외 1에게 악성프로그램 이용료 명목으로 일세 40만 원씩을 지급한 점, ③ 피고인은 악성프로그램에 감염된 컴퓨터가 시간이 지남에 따라 늘어나자 위와 같이 게임을 할 팀을 추가적으로 모집하여 공소외 1에게 소개하였을 뿐만 아니라, 다른 팀들로부터 일세를 거두어 공소외 1에게 건네주는 등 이 사건 범행 전반에 주도적으로 참여한 점, ④ 피고인은, 공소외 1이 전적으로 악성프로그램을 제작하여 유포한 것이고 그 구체적인 기능이나 기술적인 부분에 관하여는 알지 못하였다는 취지로 변소하고 있으나, 이 사건 악성프로그램은 다른 사람의 컴퓨터에 침입하여 해당 컴퓨터에 저장된 정보와 화면 등을 몰래 볼 수 있는 프로그램으로서, 인터넷 게임 사이트에서 상대방의 패를 보는 방법으로 게임하여 게임 머니 등의 수익을 거두고자 한 당초 목적을 이루려면 실질적으로 ♡♡♡을 할 피고인의 가담이 필요적으로 뒷받침되어야 하므로, 피고인과 공소외 1 사이에 사전에 실질적인 역할분담에 관한 논의가 이루어졌다고 볼 수 있는 점, ⑤ 피고인도 원심 법정에서 이 부분 공소사실을 모두 인정한 점 등을 종합하여 보면, 피고인이 공소외 1과 공모하여 이 사건 악성프로그램을 유포하였다는 이 부분 공소사실을 넉넉히 인정할 수 있으므로[피고인이 직접적으로 악성프로그램을 유포하는 행위를 하지 않았다고 하더라도, 피고인이 전체 범행에서 차지하는 지위, 역할이나 범죄 경과에 대한 지배 내지 장악력 등에 비추어 범죄에 대한 본질적 기여를 통한 기능적 행위지배가 존재하므로 악성프로그램 유포의 점에 대하여 공소외 1과 공동정범으로서의 죄책이 인정된다( 대법원 2011. 5. 13. 선고 2011도2021 판결 등 참조)], 피고인의 위 사실오인 주장은 이유 없다.

2) As to violation of the Game Industry Promotion Act

(1) Article 32 (1) 7 of the former Sound Records, Video Products and Game Software Promotion Act (repealed by Article 3 of the Addenda to the Act on the Promotion of Motion Pictures and Video Products, Act No. 7943 of April 28, 2006) provides that "the standards for handling premiums at game providing establishments (No. 2005-9)" publicly notified by the Minister of Culture and Tourism pursuant to subparagraph 3 of Article 32 of the former Sound Records, Video Products and Game Products Act shall not exchange or arrange for such exchange or repurchase premiums offered as one of the "matters to be observed at the time of providing competitive games" under subparagraph 5 (a) of the same Article, and it shall be interpreted that "the acts to exchange or resell the game products" or "the acts to exchange the game products for the purpose of Article 32 (1) 3 of the former Sound Records, Video Products and Game Products Act shall be limited to persons who are prohibited from exchange," and that such acts shall be interpreted as "the acts to exchange the game products to be prohibited from exchange" under subparagraph 1 of Article 27 of the Act.

Therefore, this part of the facts charged that the defendant received money in return for the transfer of the game money acquired by using a malicious program to the "game money" constitutes a case where the crime is not committed, and thus, the defendant's assertion of the above misapprehension of legal principles is with merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, there is no ground to believe that the Defendant violated the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. among the facts charged in the instant case, but there is a ground to reverse ex officio, as seen above, there is a ground to reverse the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing. Accordingly, the part of the judgment below against the Defendant is reversed, and the following is again decided after pleading

피고인, 제1심 공동피고인 2, 3은 공소외 1과 중국에서 악성 프로그램을 구입하여 한국에 유포하고 위 프로그램을 이용하여 ♡♡♡ ◐◐◐에 접속하는 게임 참가자들의 패를 볼 수 있도록 하여 게임머니를 취득한 후 이를 현금화하여 돈을 벌기로 하였다. 이에 따라 공소외 1은 위 프로그램을 구입·유포하는 역할을, 피고인은 제1심 공동피고인 2, 3과 위 악성프로그램을 이용하여 ♡♡♡ ◐◐◐에 접속한 후 게임머니를 얻은 후 이를 현금화하는 역할을 각각 맡기로 하고, 피고인, 제1심 공동피고인 2, 3은 하루당 40만 원(일명 ‘일세’)을 공소외 1에게 현금으로 지급한 후 나머지 수익을 3등분하기로 공모하였다.

1. Violation of Information and Communications Network Utilization Promotion Act;

No person shall transmit or spread any program (hereinafter referred to as "malicious program") that may damage, destroy, alter, or forge an information and communications system, data, program, etc., or interfere with the operation thereof without justifiable grounds.

A. The Defendant, in collusion with Nonindicted Party 1, from February 1, 201 to February 24, 201, advertised as if he had Internet users install ethyl or integrated coaches programs on the Internet website, such as ○○○ (Internet address 1 omitted) and △△△△△ (Internet address 2 omitted) (Internet address 2 omitted), which is the Internet website, and, if users receive a download of the installation program in order to install the said program, the Defendant, as a malicious program, continued to connect the computers in which the said program is installed and the malicious program storage server, which is known to the computer users, continued to connect with the malicious program so that the malicious program does not go through a white program, and installed the instant malicious program in the △△△△△△△ (Internet address 3 omitted) by means of automatically advertising the user’s computer, which is a game site provided by Nonindicted Party 3, the Internet company, and installed the instant program in the △△△△△ (hereinafter referred to as the “Internet address 2 omitted”).

B. The Defendant, Co-Defendant 2, and Co-Defendant 3 conspired with Nonindicted 1 on August 20, 201 to September 18, 2011, distributed malicious programs on a total of 81,295 computers using the same method as the foregoing paragraph 1(a).

2. Violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information.

No one shall intrude into an information and communications network without access authority or beyond permitted access authority.

피고인, 제1심 공동피고인 2, 3은 공소외 1과 공모하여 2011. 4. 일자불상경 천안시 (이하 생략) 202호에서 위 제1항과 같이 유포한 악성프로그램이 설치된 사용자 컴퓨터에서 공소외 3 주식회사가 제공하는 게임 사이트인 (인터넷주소 3 생략)에 접속할 경우 사용자 컴퓨터를 마음대로 제어할 수 있는 악성프로그램인 ☆☆☆.exe 및 리워드 프로그램 ▽▽▽.exe가 자동으로 설치되도록 한 후 ‘ ◎◎◎.exe’ 프로그램을 실행시켜 ◐◐◐게임 상대방인 인터넷 IP 주소 (IP주소 1 생략), 컴퓨터명 ‘ ▷▷▷▷▷▷’, ◐◐◐ 게임 ID ‘ ♤♤♤♤♤♤’를 사용한 성명불상자 등의 패를 보고 ♡♡♡ ◐◐◐ 게임을 하는 방법으로 정당한 접근권한 없이 타인의 정보통신망에 침입하였다.

1. Each part of the statements at the court court of the first instance by the witness Nonindicted 1, Co-defendant 2, and Nonindicted 2

1. Each statement in the original trial by the defendant and co-defendant 2 and 3 in the first instance trial

1. Each statement made by the defendant and co-defendant 2 and 3 of the first instance trial on the suspect interrogation protocol (including Non-indicted 1 substitute part)

1. Each entry in the police seizure record;

1. Attachment of the statement of transaction by Co-Defendant 2 in the first instance trial, each investigation report (where it is confirmed that Co-Defendant 3 submitted by Co-Defendant 3 of the first instance trial attached to the original documents of transaction in the new bank and the Japanese bank account, and the concept and practice of distributing this music program, the attachment of the video file CD, the investigation of the company related to the music program and the file distribution route of this case, the place of the shop shop shop shop in the music program.As a result of the ex-e analysis, the investigation report on the IP collecting user computer information, the company holding the malicious program server and the suspect's additional server server IP) each;

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Articles 71 subparag. 9 and 48(2) of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc., Article 30 of the Criminal Act (a point of spreading malicious programs), Articles 72(1)1 and 48(1) of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc., Article 30 of the Criminal Act (a point of intrusion on information and communications networks)

2. Selection of punishment;

Each Imprisonment Selection

3. Aggravation for concurrent crimes; and

Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act

Considering the following circumstances: (a) the instant crime committed by the Defendant spreads a malicious program and intrudes on another person’s computer, and thereby causing the loss of the other party’s success, it is important for the Defendant to acquire game money; (b) the purpose of the instant crime is not only planned and secret; (c) the period of the instant crime is 9 months; (d) the profits earned by the Defendant by converting the game money acquired as above into money exceeds KRW 100 million; and (e) the Defendant actively and actively participated in the instant crime; and (e) the fact that the Defendant actively participated in the instant crime; (b) the Defendant is not subject to strict punishment; (c) the Defendant is acquitted of the violation of the Game Industry Promotion Act; and (d) there is no history of punishment heavier than the fine imposed by the lower court in consideration of such circumstances as the fact that the Defendant was not subject to a heavier punishment than the penalty imposed by the lower court.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the summary of the Act on the Promotion of Game Industry is that “any person shall not exchange, arrange for exchange, or repurchase tangible or intangible results obtained through the use of a game product for business purposes. Defendant, Co-Defendant 2 and Co-Defendant 3 conspired with Nonindicted Co-Defendant 1 in collusion with the Defendant, Co-Defendant 2 and Nonindicted Co-Defendant 3 installed eight computers around April 22, 2011 (hereinafter omitted) in collusion with the Defendant, on the information and communications network of users infected with a malicious program in accordance with the method prescribed in Paragraph 2 of the holding, and carried out game money and acquired them with their plaque by using the game money. It constitutes “one game money” in the first sentence of the instant charges that purchased the game money, and thereby not guilty of the game money for business purposes by calculating the game money as KRW 10-1.6 million per cash per one million to KRW 233,300,000,000,0000 from the first instance court’s account until the date and time of exchange 2.381.1.201.”

[Attachment]

Judges higher than judges (Presiding Judge) and Kim Young-young