The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.

seizure.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence declared by the prosecutor by the court below is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. When the prosecutor changes the indictment of this case at the trial of the same time, the prosecutor applied for permission to change the indictment of this case as stated in the following facts, and since this court permitted this, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained further.

B. According to the provisions of Article 44(1)1 and Article 28(2) of the Confiscation Industry Promotion Act (hereinafter “Game Industry Act”), a person who encourages speculation by allowing others to gamble or perform other speculative acts by using game water or by leaving them to do so shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than five years or by a fine not exceeding 50 million won, and Article 44(2) of the Game Industry Act shall be punished by the punishment of imprisonment for not more than five years or by a fine not exceeding 50 million won. Article 44(2) of the Game Industry Act provides that the game products owned or occupied by a person falling under the provisions of Article 44(1) and the proceeds from such criminal acts (hereinafter “criminal proceeds”) and the property derived from criminal proceeds shall be confiscated, and if it is impossible to confiscate them, the equivalent amount shall be collected.

The court below did not confiscate the crime of this case on the ground that the crime of this case was "a person who allowed or prevented another person to perform speculative acts by making another person not aware of his name conduct an exchange, using game water," so only criminal proceeds acquired as a result of exchange are subject to confiscation and collection, and no profits acquired in the course of operating the game of this case which is not included in the scope of the facts charged cannot be confiscated and profit-making. The seized 15 copies of the original right of only 15 (No. 3), 317 (No. 4), 10,000 won (No. 5) and 10 (No. 5) from Japan, on the ground that there is no evidence to prove that the crime proceeds relating to the exchange was committed.

1. However, a game room business operator is a game for a user of the game.