The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

except that this judgment.

A. The Defendant (legal scenario)’s evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (No. 1,142 copies, No. 1,142 copies, and No. 4 of the KRW 1,1435, and hereinafter “instant seized articles”) of the District Public Prosecutor’s Office within the Suwon District Public Prosecutor’s Office, which was confiscated by the Defendant from the Defendant, cannot be deemed as the goods provided or intended to be provided for the criminal act of acquiring the instant stolen articles, or those acquired through the said criminal act, and thus, cannot be deemed as the subject of confiscation. In short, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding confiscation.

B. The prosecutor (unfair punishment) sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, three years of probation, and confiscation) is too uneasy and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Article 48(1) of the Criminal Act provides that "goods provided or intended to be provided for an act of crime" under subparagraph 1 and subparagraph 2 of Article 48 of the Criminal Act provides for "goods produced or acquired by an act of crime" as objects that can be confiscated.

The term "goods provided for an act of crime" in subparagraph 1 means goods used for an act closely related to an act of crime or an act of crime, and the term "goods intended to be provided for an act of crime" means goods prepared to be used for an act of crime but not actually used.

In addition, "goods acquired through criminal conduct" referred to in subparagraph 2 means the goods that had been in existence at the time of criminal conduct and have been obtained through criminal conduct.

Meanwhile, the proviso of Article 49 of the Criminal Act provides that “In cases where a judgment of conviction is not rendered against an accused, confiscation may be ordered when the requirements of confiscation are met.” However, there is no system that allows only confiscation to be declared separately without institution of public prosecution under our legislation. Therefore, confiscation is based on the above provision.