South Korea's Supreme Court on August 14, 2025 quashed a lower court acquittal and remanded the case to the Seoul Northern District Court, holding that a sports prediction game played with game money bought from an exchanger amounts to gambling under Article 246 of the Criminal Code1.
A correct prediction paid out game money at a pre-set odds rate, and the game money could be converted back into cash through the exchanger. The defendant deposited 15,400,000 won across 62 occasions and gambled in this way1.
The Supreme Court disagreed, finding that the game money counts as property given its exchangeability, and that because neither players nor operators can certainly predict or freely control sports results, the gain and forfeiture of game money depends on chance1.
"원심판결을 파기하고, 사건을 서울북부지방법원에 환송한다"
The court restated the definition of gambling as betting property and determining gain or loss by chance, adding that chance is judged subjectively and does not require objective uncertainty, and that gambling can be established even if a person's skill affects the outcome, so long as chance has some influence1. The panel was led by Justice Noh Kyung-pil, with Justice Lee Heung-gu as presiding justice and Justices Oh Seok-jun and Lee Sook-yeon1.
| Stage | Court | Date | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| First appeal | Seoul Northern District Court (2024No940) | 2025-04-17 | Acquittal |
| Final appeal | Supreme Court (2025Do6368) | 2025-08-14 | Acquittal quashed, case remanded |
What it means for players
The ruling treats game money bought through an exchanger as property, and a prediction game whose payouts depend on sports results as gambling, even where the site itself supplies the game money. For players in South Korea, that means using an exchanger to buy or cash out game money can support a gambling charge, and the court said the intent to gamble can be inferred from how the exchanger was used, how long it went on and how much was exchanged1. The decision concerns the definition of gambling under the Criminal Code rather than the licensing rules for betting operators, and it does not address penalties for any individual. Details of how the remanded trial will treat the defendant have not been reported.
What happens next
The case returns to the Seoul Northern District Court, which must hear it again in line with the Supreme Court's reasoning1. No date for the new proceedings has been reported.
Sources1 sources
- 판례 > 도박 | 국가법령정보센터, law.go.kr
