All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and eight months.

247,849,500 won from the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (as to the first judgment), all of the accounts administered by the call center where customers remitted money to customers, and the accounts which exchange the result of the game to customers, and the Defendant is entirely unable to participate in the money exchange business. The lower court calculated the criminal proceeds by summing up the sum of the amounts deposited from AD, AE, AF, AG, AH, AH, AH, AJ, and AK accounts under the name of the Defendant’s investigative agency from November 1, 201 to April 2013, as stated by the Defendant’s statement in the investigation agency, and calculated the criminal proceeds as the sum of the amounts deposited from AD, AE, AF, AH, AH, AJ, and AK accounts, but most of the amounts deposited from the said accounts were paid by the Defendant directly by participating in

B. The punishment of each judgment of the court below on unfair sentencing (the first judgment on the judgment of the court below: imprisonment with prison labor for a year and June, and the second judgment of the court below: imprisonment with prison labor for a period of four months) is too unreasonable.

2. Before determining the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, this Court decided to consolidate each appeal case against the judgment of the court below. Since the first and second judgments of the court below found the defendant guilty in relation to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the separate punishment like the first and second judgments of the court below cannot be punished, and the punishment should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained in this respect.

There is such reason for ex officio reversal against the defendant.

Even if the defendant's argument of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles on the judgment of the court of first instance is still subject to the judgment of the court of this Court

3. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

(a) In Article 32 (1) 7 of the Game Industry Promotion Act, any person shall score points, give free gifts and games obtained from the use of game products;