logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.09.21 2018고정520
게임산업진흥에관한법률위반
Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fine, the Defendants did not pay the fine.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendants are juvenile game providing business operators who install 21 players in the Gwanak-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City D and 1, and operate a type of "E".

A juvenile game providing business entity shall not promote speculation by providing free gifts, etc., the total use of which exceeds 5,00 won in the consumer's selling price for all game products.

Nevertheless, from October 17, 2017 to January 3, 2018, the Defendants installed a game machine, “shared”, which is a game product for the entire use of the said “E” from around October 17, 2017 to around January 3, 2018, and offered 19,340 won for sale by consumers, “WTS Blus micro”, and “the sales by consumers are equivalent to KRW 29,900” as “the sales by consumers.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The protocol concerning the interrogation of each police suspect against the Defendants

1. Reporting on detection (Violation of the Act on the Promotion of Game Industry);

1. Registration certificate;

1. All on-site photographs;

1. The screen for microprice WS-858, the minimum search screen for radio microphones, and free-to-door photographs and Internet prices;

1. On-site investigation reports;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning field photographs extracted from public figures;

1. The Defendants: Article 44 (1) 1-2 of the Act on the Promotion of Game Industry, Article 28 subparagraph 2 of the same Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act

2. Defendants to be detained in the workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act;

3. Defendants of the provisional payment order: Determination as to the allegations by the Defendants and their defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (the grounds for conviction)

1. Summary of the assertion

A. Defendant A was not an employee, but an employee, of the type of extraction as stated in the judgment.

B. The premiums set out in the reasoning in the decision in which a person is extracted are all valuable, and therefore, the consumer’s sales did not exceed 5,000 won, so there is no fact that a person has promoted speculation.

2. Determination

(a) The Game Industry Promotion Act is a juvenile game providing business;

arrow