The judgment below

Of the above, the part of collection against Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B KRW 33,442,067 shall be additionally collected.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and misunderstanding of facts, on the grounds that the Defendant’s amount equivalent to the benefits that he acquired while working at the gambling site operation organization of the instant gambling site was additionally collected pursuant to Articles 10(1) and 8(1) of the Act on the Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds (hereinafter “the Act on the Regulation of Concealment of Criminal Proceeds”), but the Defendant’s amount equivalent to the Defendant’s wage does not constitute criminal proceeds, etc. under the aforementioned Act, and thus, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts as to the collection.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, confiscation, additional collection of 240 million won) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (1) In fact, the lower court sentenced the Defendant to collect the amount equivalent to the benefits that the Defendant acquired while working at the instant gambling site operation organization pursuant to Articles 10(1) and 8(1) of the Act on Regulation of Concealment of Criminal Proceeds. However, the Defendant’s amount equivalent to the Defendant’s salary does not constitute criminal proceeds, etc. under the above Act, and thus, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts as to the collection of penalty.

B) Even if the amount equivalent to the Defendant’s wage constitutes criminal proceeds, Defendant B’s amount equivalent to the wages actually accrued while working at the gambling site operation organization of this case is KRW 19,324,00, and thus, it cannot be collected additionally.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which sentenced the collection of additional collection exceeding the above amount is erroneous in the misconception of facts concerning the collection of additional collection.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year and two months of imprisonment, confiscation, additional collection KRW 33,453,200) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Act on Regulation of Concealment of Criminal Proceeds as to whether the Defendants can additionally collect the amount equivalent to the benefits that the Defendants acquired in relation to each of the instant crimes [Attachment] subparagraph 1(g) of the same attached Table is “crime of opening gambling spaces” and Article 46 of the same attached Table is “crimes under Article 47 of the National Sports Promotion Act” respectively.