The Regulation In Criminal Law Of Illegal Operating Gambling Machines

Now, in order to enrich people's culture life, the operators are constantly racking their brains to increase or renovate their own game entertainment project. But not all entertainment comply with the relevant provisions of the state. In order to protect people's health and safety in carrying on these entertainment project, the state limits some implementation in some parts of the entertainment activity, there into, the recreational machines with the gambling character, also known as the gambling machines, these are all in countries banned list. In this paper, from an illegal case of operating gambling machines, through exploring this kind of illegal behavior. try to regulate these behavior.This article through four parts to Lin Jingquan's illegal gambling machine case leading to analyses the related legal problems:The first section: the cause of the case. Lin Jingquan run slot machine illegally.The second section: basic introduction of the case. Lin Jingquan run slot machine illegally in the electronic game place without legal license. He employed Pan Huifeng to manage and illegally seeked more than 10 thousand RMB.The third section: the controversial focus of the case. Mainly introduce the detail of the case, in which Lin Jingquan run the slot machine illegally, and extend two controversial problems: First, whether the action of running slot machine is The crime of illegal business operations or opening casino crime? Second, whether the employee in the gamble place is a complicity of opening casino crime?The forth section: the theoretical analysis of the controversial focus. This is the core section of this paper. This paper gave detail analysis and discussion separately on the two controversial problems, which mainly contains action judgment of running slot machine in electronic game place without legal license, the action characteristic of using slot machine, the research of illegally running slot machine, the characterization of illegally running slot machine and discussion of whether the employee is a complicity of running slot machine, etc. The author also gave evaluation and judgment of the controversial focus based on the relative theory and the reality of the case. The fifth section: research conclusion. Based on the analysis of the case and the relative theory, this paper conclude that Lin Jingquan constitute of opening casino crime. This paper also conclude that the action of the employee Pan Huifeng coincide with the complicity of opening casino crime, he should be given criminal sanctions of opening casino crime. In addition, through this research, the author found that the current lack of gambling institutions into open gambling house crime of the unified national regulations, practice resulted in similar cases treatment exists obvious regional differences. Therefore, hope to establish unified standard, unified in the country within specified limits for local differences in rules is more consistent with the crime legal principle.