The judgment below

The penalty collection portion shall be reversed.

20,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

The judgment below

(2).

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, misunderstanding of legal principles and misunderstanding of facts, the court below ordered the collection of KRW 95,234,00,000, including all of the amounts, even though the amount that the Defendant received as “wages” from B, etc. concerning the operation of the gambling site of this case should be excluded from the amount of collection. However, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles and misunderstanding of

B. The sentence of the lower court (the penalty of 10 months, 95, 234,000 won, which has been imposed by imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Article 47 subparag. 2 of the National Sports Promotion Act provides that property acquired through similar acts by a person subject to punishment under Article 47 subparag. 2 of the Act on the misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine regarding the amount of additional collection shall be subject to additional collection under Article 51 subparag. 1 and subparag. 3 of the National Sports Promotion Act, and the above additional collection aims to deprive him/her of unlawful profits and prevent him/her from holding it. Thus, in cases where he/she gains profits through similar acts in common, the amount of money distributed, i.e., the profit actually accrued shall be collected individually

Meanwhile, inasmuch as the cost spent by an offender to obtain criminal proceeds was merely a method of consuming criminal proceeds even if it was spent from criminal proceeds, it does not constitute a deduction from criminal proceeds to be collected (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2008Do1312, Jun. 26, 2008; 2015Do3351, Jul. 23, 2015). Therefore, in cases where the principal offender who committed similar acts under the National Sports Promotion Act pays wages to an employee who is an accomplice, if it can be deemed that it was paid as part of distributing criminal proceeds, an amount equivalent to the amount of wages that he/she received from an employee who is an accomplice may be collected as a penalty pursuant to Article 51(1) and (3) of the National Sports Promotion Act.

On the other hand, if the principal offender paid the salary to an employee who is an accomplice as part of the expense expenditure in order to obtain criminal proceeds simply, it is nothing more than the payment of the salary.