본문 바로가기 주메뉴로 바로가기
All
TITLE 【Syllabus of Latest Opinion】Supreme Court en banc Decision 2018Do7172 Decided October 30, 2018 【Violation of the National Sports Promotion Act (Opening of a Gambling Place, Etc.); Operation of a Gambling Establishment; Violation of the National Sports Promotion Act (Gambling, Etc.); Regular Gambling; Inciting Violation of the Credit Information Use and Protection Act; False Testimony】 [full Text]
Summary
[1] Legislative intent of Article 26(2) Subparags. 1, 2, and 3 of the National Sports Promotion Act, which prohibit acts related to “similar acts” as prohibited under Article 26(1) of the National Sports Promotion Act (amended by Act No. 11309, Feb. 17, 2012) and, particularly, the intent in prohibiting the act stipulated in Subparag. 1 and in punishing the perpetrator thereof
[2] In a case concerning a system that issues sports betting tickets using information communications network: (a) Party A procured in-game currency from a system operator in advance, which is indispensable for buying sports betting tickets to bet on the outcome of sports matches; and (b) rewarded members with in-game currency in exchange for money, whether such an act constitutes an act of providing the said system to the public for use, as stipulated in Article 26(2) Subparag. 1 (affirmative) and whether only an operator of the system issuing sports betting tickets is in a position to provide the said system to the public for use (negative)
Matters to be taken account of when interpreting the acts stipulated in Subparag. 1 of the said provision
[3] In a case where the Defendants: (a) conspired with Party A, etc. to sign an intermediary contract with an operating entities of foreign online sports betting sites, whereby they agreed to recruit an unspecified number of many locals as its members through an intermediary site, and to make them place bets on the outcome of various sports matches; (b) either rewarded members winning at the bet with in-game currency in accordance with the pre-determined ratio where a bet comes true, or acquired the deposited money when members lost the bet; and (c) were indicted on the charge of violating the National Sports Promotion Act, a case holding that the Defendants’ act constitutes “an act of providing a system of issuing sports betting tickets by means of information communications networks to the public for use” as stipulated in Article 26(2) Subparag. 1 of the said Act
Prev 【Syllabus of Latest Opinion】Supreme Court en banc Decision 2016Do10912 Decided November 1, 2018【Violation of the Military Service Act】* First draft
Next 【Syllabus of Latest Opinion】Supreme Court en banc Decision 2014Da235189 Decided October 30, 2018 【Payment of Construction】* First draft
219 Seocho-ro,Seocho-gu,Seoul 06590,Republic of Korea 02-3480-1100