TITLE	Supreme Court en banc Decision 2018Do7172 Decided October 30, 2018 ¡¼Violation of the National Sports Promotion Act (Opening of Gambling Parlors, Etc.); Operation of 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¡½ [full Text]
Summary
[1] Legislative intent of Article 26(2) Subparags. 1, 2, and 3 of the National Sports Promotion Act (amended by Act No. 11309, Feb. 17, 2012), which proscribe activities related to the ¡°similar act¡± prohibited under Article 26(1) of the Act and, particularly, the intent of prohibiting the act stipulated in Subparag. 1 and punishing its perpetrator [2] In a case concerning a system that issues sports betting tickets, etc. using information and communications networks, where: (a) Party A procured in-game currency, which is indispensable for buying sports betting tickets used for betting on the outcome of sports matches, in advance from a system operator; and (b) provided members with the in-game currency in exchange for money, whether such acts constitute an act of providing the said issuing system for the public to use, as stipulated in Article 26(2) Subparag. 1 (affirmative) and whether only an operator having the authority to manage the system issuing sports betting tickets is in a position to provide the said system to the public for use (negative) Matters to be considered when interpreting the acts, etc., including the foregoing Subparag. 1 act [3] In a case where the Defendants, conspiring with Party A, etc.: (a) signed an intermediary contract with an operating entity of foreign online sports betting sites; (b) recruited numerous unspecified Korean nationals as members of the said intermediary site, which enabled the members to place bets on the outcome of various sports matches; (c) operated the said intermediary site by either rewarding the winning bettors at a predetermined ratio, or acquiring the betting money in the event members lost the bet; and (d) 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 and communications networks to the public for use¡± as stipulated in Article 26(2) Subparag. 1 of the said Act

Prev	Supreme Court en banc Decision 2014Da235189 Decided October 30, 2018 ¡¼Construction Payment¡½
Next	Supreme Court en banc Decision 2014Da61654 Decided October 30, 2018¡¼Damages (Etc.)¡½