인터넷 바카라

1. Overview of the case

① Barun Law defended a defendant A who was responsible for managing the gambling proceeds by receiving reports on the details of recharging and exchanging gambling money at a gambling website, and 인터넷 바카라 B and C in charge of recharging and exchanging gambling money at the gambling site.
 

② Background of the case: At the recommendation of D, whom A met while working at a cell phone store in the past, A was responsible for receiving reports on the details of recharging and exchanging gambling funds on the gambling site and managing the proceeds for about a year from around March 2015, recruiting acquaintances to carry out gambling money recharging and exchanging activities at the gambling site, and procuring daily necessities. During the period when A was involved in operating the gambling site, the total amount of money remitted by members on the gambling site amounted to KRW14,151,686,828.
 

B and C are acquaintances of D. B, at the recommendation of D, and C, through B, participated in the operation of the gambling site and engaged in recharging and exchanging gambling funds for approximately 1 year from around March 2015, and for approximately 4 months from around July 2015, respectively.
 

Meanwhile, other accomplices E and F, who participated in the operation of the gambling site and were in charge of recharging and exchange gambling money, were already sentenced to one year in prison prior to this ruling. In light of the relevant precedents, there was a very high risk that 인터넷 바카라 A, B, and C would be sentenced to prison.

 

2. Contents of the judgment [Uijeongbu District Court Goyang Branch Decision 2023Godan1228, dated October 19, 2023]

The court found the 인터넷 바카라 guilty on all counts. However, in light of the findings that the 인터넷 바카라 generally admitted their crimes, had no past criminal record of being punished for the same crime, participated in the crime under the condition of receiving a monthly salary, and it did not appear that they were in the position of being distributed criminal proceeds or executing the operation of the gambling site, the court sentenced the defendant A to 3 years in prison and 5 years of probation, the defendant B to 2 years in prison and 3 years of probation, and the defendant C to 1 year and 2 months in prison and 3 years of probation.

 

3. Our role

 

Initially, the investigative agency believed that defendant A had a position close to the operator of the gambling site. However, we carefully reviewed the evidence submitted by the prosecutors and determined that ① the informant's tip, which was the starting point of the investigation, was not credible and ② circumstances surrounding the upload of materials (i.e., the account statements of gambling funds that were uploaded onto the webhard and gambling money recharging and exchanging information) that allegedly served as the basis for pointing out defendant A as the operator of the gambling site were unclear. We also refuted that ③ the person on the gambling site whom the investigators designated as defendant A was not in fact defendant A. We convinced the court to have reasonable doubt about the degree of defendant A's participation in the alleged crime and that he did not fall under the “main culprit.” In addition, we pointed out that ⑥ the proceeds of crime were not specified and there was no evidence to suggest that the 인터넷 바카라 were distributed the proceeds of crime. ⑦ Carefully collecting and reviewing sentencing precedents favorable to the 인터넷 바카라, we emphasized that this case was not a case that warrants a prison sentence.

 

4. Significance of the judgment

The accomplices who were tried first based on the same facts had already been sentenced to prison, but through our active defense activities, all 인터넷 바카라 who were later indicted were sentenced to probation. This case is significant in that it shows a client's status can change depending on attorneys’ advocacy activities.

 

□ Attorneys in charge : Park Sung-ho, Choi Seung-hwan, Lee Yun-sang and Seo Jang-cheol