The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant received KRW 30,000,000,000 from the charge of the previous final and conclusive judgment (the Busan District Court Decision 2013 High Court Decision 844) and all of the instant crimes. However, the lower court’s order of additional collection of KRW 30,000,000,00 from the Defendant, including criminal proceeds from the crime of the previous final and conclusive judgment, is in violation of the principle of non-existence of interest, and it is practically impossible to distinguish the Defendant’s criminal proceeds from those of the previous final and conclusive judgment from those of the instant charges. Thus, it is practically impossible to impose additional collection on the Defendant under the principle of the Criminal Procedure Act, which requires strict proof, and

Even if the court below ordered the collection of 30 million won for the defendant, the court below's judgment that ordered the collection of 30 million won for the above reasons is erroneous in the misunderstanding of legal principles as to the collection of additional charges, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment (hereinafter “Criminal Proceeds Act”) of the relevant legal principles is subject to additional collection under Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Concealment of Criminal Proceeds, and Articles 8 and 10 of the same Act. The above additional collection aims to deprive the above illegal gains and prevent them from being held. On the other hand, whether they are subject to additional collection does not require strict certification. However, if it is not possible to specify the criminal proceeds, additional collection under Article 10 of the Criminal Proceeds Act is arbitrary, so whether they are subject to additional collection shall not be subject to additional collection under the court’s discretion.

The judgment of the court below should be made (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do2451 delivered on June 14, 2007, etc.). (b) The reasons for the judgment of the court below are as follows.