A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Seized evidence shall be confiscated.

A. The sentence of the lower court (the imprisonment of eight months and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. The judgment of the court below which did not render an additional collection on the ground of the misapprehension of the legal principle of prosecutor 1) is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principle of additional collection.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Article 44(2) of the Act on the Promotion of Game Industry for the Determination of Additional Collection requires confiscation of game products owned or occupied by a person who exchanged a game result in violation of Article 32(1)7 of the same Act, and property derived from criminal proceeds, and where confiscation is impossible, the equivalent amount shall be additionally collected.

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, i.e., (i) the Defendant stated by the prosecution that daily inputs during the game room operation period would exceed KRW 10 million; (ii) it appears that the operator of the illegal game room would not make any statement by gathering more than the actual size; (iii) the Defendant’s daily inputs of KRW 891,00 in the game machine at the time of seizure around July 21, 2016 were put in total at KRW 3,075,000; and (iv) the Kakter separately seized KRW 1,00,000 in daily inputs prepared in advance, even if considering KRW 1,00,000,000 on July 21, 2016, it appears that the daily inputs of around 6, 2016, which the Defendant stated, exceed KRW 1,000,0000 on the day of seizure from around 26, 2016 to the day of seizure.