Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, from the date of the conclusion of the judgment, each of the above two years against the Defendants.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is the F representative director of the Internet Security Corporation, which is the Internet Security Corporation that develops defense chains and equipment against DNA attack, and the defendant B is the director of the above company.

It is necessary for those who operate the Internet illegal gambling site to respond to the server access and to defend such drone attack in the operation of the gambling site as a relation with the frequent use of the method of attracting the customers by making a DNA attack on the competitive gambling site (DOS; Distributed Dervice).

The Defendants thought to provide the “G” et al. operating the aforementioned illegal gambling site with the DNA defense program developed by the Defendants Company.

G et al. operated an Internet illegal gambling site, such as “H” and “I, as the room was established and opened by filling a certain amount of money equivalent to the same amount to a specific account with many unspecified customers (i.e., source = 100,000 notice per point, 200,000 notice, etc.) into the account, and operating a gambling site, such as a kier, Bad, Bad, Bad, and Bad, which gives property benefits or causes losses to gambling actors according to the winning book of a friendly result.

From December 2, 2013 to March 11, 2014, the Defendants provided a 6807 or 6803-hour monitoring service for the above site operated by G, etc. at the above company’s office located in Jongno-gu Seoul Jongno-gu Seoul, by providing DNA defense programs and its programs to operate the said site in an effective and efficient manner, so that the above illegal gambling site can be smoothly operated by avoiding a competitive gambling site operator’s DNA attack.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to establish gambling spaces on the Internet for profit-making purposes by those who are not aware of G or other names.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each of the Defendants’ respective legal statements 1.