beta
Text
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for three months and by imprisonment for ten months.
However, from the date this judgment became final and conclusive, Defendant.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendants are pro-friendly siblings.
1. From April 17, 2013 to May 9, 2013, the prosecutor of the violation of the Act on the Promotion of Game Industry in Defendant B changed the indictment by adding the ancillary charges to the Defendants, in addition to the previous charges charged, on July 20, 2017.
This Court found Defendant B guilty of violating the Act on the Promotion of Game Industry from April 17, 2013 to May 9, 2013. Thus, it does not separately determine as to the conjunctive charges (violation of the Act on the Promotion of Game Industry from March 17, 2013 to May 9, 2013).
F is the owner of the business that operates the “H” on the second floor of the G building in Gangnam-si, and the defendant is the partner who supplies the game machine to the head of the game and divide profits. I is the head of the business responsible for the management of the game room and exchange, and the J is the employee who is in charge of the management of the game room and exchange, etc. at the Kabter of the above game room or arranging items cards, etc.
No one shall engage in the business of converting into money or arranging exchange or re-purchase of tangible or intangible results obtained through the use of game water.
The Defendant, in collusion with F, J, and I on April 17, 2013, from around May 9, 2013 to around May 9, 2013, the Defendant exchanged the color item card obtained by using the said “H” with the fishing game apparatus in exchange for KRW 9,000 per head in the said game room. During the said business period, F obtained profits of KRW 4,00,000,000, and the Defendant obtained profits of KRW 8,00,000.
2. Defendant A’s criminal offender also assumes that Defendant A was involved in the operation of H from January 2013 to February 6, 2013. The ancillary charge is based on the premise that Defendant A was involved in the operation of H from March 2013 to May 9, 2013.
As seen later, Defendant A during the above period H.