게임산업진흥에관한법률위반
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The lower court, with respect to the collection charge against the Defendant, did not distinguish criminal proceeds and legitimate business proceeds from illegal money exchange; the Defendant, operating the game of this case, without deducting the expenses incurred for ordinary business expenses, considered all KRW 97,501,00, which was deposited in the account of the Nonghyup Bank in the name of the Defendant from August 30, 2015 to January 31, 2016 as criminal proceeds, and calculated the amount of the additional collection. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the additional collection.
2. Determination
A. As to the assertion that criminal proceeds cannot be specified, the criminal facts of this case are not only the defendant's business of exchanging the result obtained through the use of game water, but also the defendant's business of operating the game of this case, which caused the game of this case to perform speculative acts by using the game water, and criminal proceeds generated thereby are collected in accordance with Article 44 (2) of the Game Industry Promotion Act.
Therefore, the defendant's assertion that it is improper to collect all profits without distinguishing profits from exchange because it is included in the range of additional collection prior to criminal proceeds due to the operation of the game of this case.
B. As to the assertion that operating expenses should be deducted, the expenses paid by the offender to obtain criminal proceeds in addition to the collection of criminal proceeds have been disbursed from criminal proceeds.
Even if it is merely a method of consuming criminal proceeds, it does not constitute a deduction from criminal proceeds to be collected (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do6775, Nov. 15, 2007). In addition, the crime of this case was not only exchanged but also caused a speculative act by using game water while operating the game of this case. As seen earlier, the rent for the game site building (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do2223, May 14, 2009) and the tax, etc. paid in the course of the business of the game room, such as electricity.