Dismissal of appeal against conviction for illegal gambling without a license

Facts

Parties:
Appellant: [A.] , represented by attorney Camill Droll
Respondents: 1. Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Aargau, 2. Federal Gaming Board ESBK

Facts:
[A.] is accused of having, between January 1, 2017, and September 3, 2019, at the [B.] inn, without a license, offered the table devices U23415 and U23417 with various casino games. The Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau convicted [A.] on May 7, 2024, of operating casino games without a license (Art. 130 para. 1 lit. a GamblA). It imposed a conditional fine of 50 daily rates of CHF 140.-- and ordered him to pay a restitution claim of CHF 180,000.--. The seized table devices U23415 and U23417 remain with the ESBK for a separate confiscation procedure, while the seized data and notes are to be returned to [A.] upon the finality of the judgment. The cash contents of the two table devices and a cash box were confiscated.

Appeal:
[A.] requests, by way of appeal in criminal matters, that the higher court judgment be set aside and he be acquitted. Alternatively, the case should be remanded to the Higher Court for re-evaluation.

Considerations

The appeal must be substantiated, whereby, based on the considerations of the challenged decision, it must be concisely stated to what extent it violates the law (Art. 42 para. 1 and para. 2 sentence 1 FSCA). The factual findings and evaluation of evidence by the lower court can only be challenged if they are obviously incorrect or are based on a violation of the law within the meaning of Art. 95 FSCA, and if the correction of the defect can be decisive for the outcome of the proceedings (Art. 97 para. 1 FSCA; Art. 105 para. 1 and 2 FSCA).

The appellant challenges his conviction for operating casino games without a license pursuant to Art. 130 para. 1 lit. a GamblA. The Gambling Act (GamblA) was adopted in the popular vote of June 10, 2018, and combines the previous Casino Act and the Lottery Act. The applicability of the Gambling Act is undisputed.

The appellant alleges a violation of Art. 1 para. 1 CrimPC in conjunction with Art. 300 para. 1 lit. CrimPC. The ESBK opened a procedure after receiving an anonymous letter on December 18, 2018. The…