2017 Highest 849 Violation of the Game Industry Promotion Act

2017 Highest 2438 (Consolidation)

1. A (73 - 1), D Joint Owners

2. B (52 - 2), D

3. C (61 - 1), daily work

B. Shok water, yellow stone (prosecutions), Kim Il-san (Public trial)

Law Firm Han-mun et al.

Attorney Kim Jong-tae, Justice Kim Jong-sik, and Park Jong-tae (for all the Defendants, the defendant)

for ar B

May 25, 2017

Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, by imprisonment for a year and by imprisonment for a year, and by imprisonment for a period of eight months, respectively.

48,000,000 won shall be collected from Defendant A.

The amount equivalent to the above additional collection charge shall be ordered to be paid provisionally.

Facts of crime

2017 Highest 849

No person shall engage in the business of exchanging or arranging exchange or re-purchasing tangible and intangible results obtained through the use of game products.

A. Roles between the Defendants and the accomplices

Defendant A is a 30% share, Defendant B is a 30% share with Defendant E, the husband of his female, and F is a 40% share with “D” in Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City A.

Defendant C, in the form of Defendant A, served as the ‘corrogate' in which the police officers belonging to the Incheon Metropolitan Police Agency, the Incheon Metropolitan Police Agency, the control department of illegal game site, possessed a camera with the vehicle number indicating the vehicle number, and served as the "corrogate to view the network in preparation for enforcement."

G is the head of the business office who has been employed by the above joint business owners and was in charge of the practical operation of the above game site. In addition, in preparation for the crackdown of investigation agencies in the future, the role of "the chief of the business office of the game site" was also in charge of the role of "the chief of the business office".

H and I had been employed by the said common business owners in charge of exchange work against customers in the above game area.

B. Specific criminal facts

Defendant A, Defendant B, and Defendant C, along with other accomplices, set up 50 game machines, including “J” in the above game room from October 2015 to March 8, 2016, according to the aforementioned division of roles.

After providing a large number of customers, the game money acquired through the game was made to be accumulated in the card using a points card accumulation machine located in the calculation stand, and exchanged the remainder after deducting 10% of the game money as commission in cash.

As a result, Defendant A, Defendant B, and Defendant C committed an act of exchanging the results obtained through game products in collusion with other accomplices.

"2017 Highest 2438"

피고인은 인천 연수구 AB에서 ' K ' 를 운영하던 사람으로 2014 . 6 . 11 . 경부터 2014 . 9 . 25 . 경까지 사이에 위 게임장에 전체이용가 게임물인 ' 땡큐샷 ' 게임기 40대 및 ' 해피건 플러스 ' 40대를 순차로 설치하여 불특정 다수의 손님에게 제공한 후 종업원들을 통해 손님들이 위 게임을 통하여 획득한 게임머니를 점수보관증에 적립해주고 , 피고인 A는 손님들이 점수보관증을 제시하면 10 % 를 제외한 금액을 현금으로 환전해주었다 .

Accordingly, the defendant was engaged in the exchange of tangible and intangible results obtained through the use of game products.

Summary of Evidence

“2017 Highest 849

1. Defendant A’s legal statement

1. Defendant B and C’s partial statement

1. Each prosecutor's interrogation protocol against Defendant A;

1. The suspect interrogation protocol of Defendant C by the police officer

1. Examination of suspect suspect regarding L by prosecution;

1. Each police interrogation protocol of F, G, and I:

1. Some police suspect interrogation protocol of H;

1. Each report on investigation;

“2017 Highest 2438

1. Defendant A’s legal statement

1. Each prosecutor's interrogation protocol of F, B, and M;

1. N’s protocol of interrogation of the police officer;

1. Each internal investigation report, each investigation report, game prospectus, the ledger of registration of the game industry, the certificate of registration of juvenile game providing business entities, and a piracy game description;

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and the selection of punishment for the crime;

A. Defendant A: Articles 44(1)2 and 32(1)7 of the Game Industry Promotion Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (integrated) and Articles 44(1)2 and 32(1)7 of the Act on the Promotion of Game Industry; the choice of imprisonment, respectively,

(a) Defendant B, C: Each of the subparagraphs 2 and 3 of Article 44(1)2, Article 32(1)7, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, and each of the subparagraphs of imprisonment with labor

1. Aggravation (Defendant A)

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

1. Additional collection (Defendant A);

The latter part of Article 44 (2) of the Game Industry Promotion Act

1. Provisional payment order (Defendant A);

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Reasons for sentencing

The Defendants’ crime of this case is promoting the general public’s spirit of gambling and impairing the sound will to work, and it is necessary to strictly punish the Defendants. Furthermore, it is prepared to find out the number of police officers controlling the crime through police officials as well as the following. Defendant A led the crime of this case; Defendant A was provided with information about the above vehicle from police officials for a certain period of time; Defendant A went away from investigation; in particular, Defendant A continued to abscond for a long period of time and arrested only by arrest warrant; Defendant B was subject to punishment; Defendant C was subject to punishment for the same kind of crime; Defendant C was also subject to punishment for the same kind of crime; Defendant C was also subject to punishment; Defendant C was also subject to punishment for the same kind of crime; Defendant C was also subject to punishment; Defendant C was also subject to punishment for the same kind of crime; Defendant C; Defendant C was also subject to punishment for the same kind of crime; Defendant C was also subject to punishment for the same reason as Defendant C; Defendant C was also subject to punishment for the same kind of crime.

Judges Lee Lee Jae-hoon