The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., fraud) is unreasonable that the court below did not confiscate 40 game instruments (No. 1), smartphones (No. 7), 168 (No. 2), 162 (No. 3), 58 (No. 4), 58 (No. 4), 58 (No. 4), 1,000 won worth worth), 168 (No. 22 (No. 3), 22 (No. 3), and 58 (No. 4) which were provided for the instant crime by the defendant.

2. As the confiscation under Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act takes place voluntarily, the issue of whether to confiscate an article that meets the requirements for confiscation is left at the discretion of the court (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Do515, Sept. 4, 2002). Considering all the circumstances, such as the contents and circumstances of the instant crime acknowledged by the records of this case, the disadvantage of the defendant caused by the confiscation, and the practical benefits from the crime prevention of confiscation, etc., the lower court did not err by exceeding the discretion of the court that did not deviate from the discretion of the court that did not confiscate the game machine of this case.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.