beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles as to collection);
A. The criminal proceeds that should be additionally collected cannot be deemed to have been specified, inasmuch as there is no evidence as to the proceeds from the instant crime, if the Defendant and B excluded from a vague statement made by the investigative agency.
B. Even if not, profits from the operation of the game room are divided into profits from money exchange and profits from the use of the game machine. Since the defendant was prosecuted only as a business operating the game room, profits from the use of the game machine can not be subject to additional collection, and only 10% of profits from money exchange should be subject to additional collection.
2. Determination
A. As to the assertion that criminal proceeds are not specified, 1) confiscation, whether it is subject to additional collection, or recognition of additional collection should be acknowledged based on evidence, but it does not require strict proof as to the constituent elements of the crime. According to the protocol of examination prepared by the prosecution, it is recognized that the Defendant stated in the prosecutor’s investigation process to the effect that “the daily exchange amount of a game room is an average of 50,000 won, and profits from exchange is an average of 50,000 won, and profits from exchange are 50,000 won,” “the sum of profits from the use of the game machine and profits from exchange is 6,50,000 won,” and “26-day business operation.”
3) Since the recognition of additional collection due to the operation of a game room does not require strict certification, even if there is no other evidence such as the business account book, it can be specified that the defendant obtained 6,50,000 won in the aggregate of 50,000 won in the average daily currency exchange for 26 days, as well as 6,000 won in the total of 60,000 won in the use of the game machine. (b) The argument that only the profits from money exchange should be subject to additional collection is below 1) the Game Industry Promotion Act.