beta
Text
The judgment below
The part against the defendant shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.
except that this judgment.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts as to the part of confiscation and misunderstanding of legal principles) of the evidence 23 through 25, which is the seized article of this case, is subject to confiscation, but the court below did not render a sentence of confiscation as to each of the above seized articles from the
2. Determination of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to the confiscated portion
A. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, it is reasonable to view that the evidence Nos. 23 through 25, which is the seized object of this case, is the profit from the crime of this case and subject to the necessary confiscation under Article 44(2) of the Game Industry Promotion Act.
① The instant crime was committed in collusion with co-defendant A of the lower judgment by providing only 10,000 points per cash to customers who play the game in the instant game, and then exchanging the points acquired by customers in cash.
② On August 6, 2019, around 18:30 on the day of control, a total of 2,964,00 won in cash in the game of this case (Evidence 7 through 12, 14 through 16, 18 through 22, 164, 164, 164, 25, 1,199, 48, 48-50, 48-50, 16, and 1,000 won in cash in the game of this case) was seized (proced evidence 23 through 25, 100, 100 won, 16,00 won in cash received from customers).
(Investigation Records 50,51,230). ③ The lower court additionally collected KRW 34,670,000,000, which was seized in the instant game room, as criminal proceeds, from Co-defendant A (i.e., daily average exchange earnings x 50,000 x 753 days from July 15, 2017 to August 6, 2019).
(Investigation Records 266 pages). (b)
Therefore, the fact that the court below was not sentenced to the confiscation sentence against the No. 23 to 25 of the evidence seized by the court below is erroneous or necessary confiscation.