The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Since the confiscation stipulated in Article 8 of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment is discretionary, whether or not to confiscate any property that meets the requirements of confiscation is left at the discretion of the court.

(1) In light of the above legal principles, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on confiscation, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, even if the court below did not render a forfeiture of the right to claim the return of the lease deposit preserved for forfeiture by the Ulsan District Court 2019 early 904, and thus did not adversely affect the conclusion of the judgment.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.