The judgment below

The penalty collection portion shall be reversed.

2,120,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

The remainder of the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts, violation of law, and improper sentencing) can not be collected from the defendant 2.94 million won.

The amount of punishment (ten months of imprisonment, confiscation, and collection) is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant and B acquired KRW 1.40,00,00,000 equivalent to KRW 329,01,250,000, which was withdrawn from June 29, 2018 to March 20, 2019 from June 29, 2018; and the Defendant and B acquired KRW 1.65,00,00,000, which was divided equally.

was stated.

Only 1/2 (82 thousand won) shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

Under the premise that the Defendant and B shared reverted to 1.64 million won, the Defendant acquired criminal proceeds of 2.9 million won (1.3 million won in the amount equivalent to 0.5% in the amount of 0.5% in the amount of 1.3 million won in the Tong).

Recognizing that the court below ordered the collection of the corresponding amount, there is an error of misconception of facts or in violation of law affecting the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s decision on the unfair argument of sentencing is within the scope of the recommended sentence according to the attached sentencing guidelines (from August to June).

The punishment was imposed in consideration of the defendant's reflectivity, non-exclusive role, etc., but considering the nature of the crime.

The court below did not err in selecting and applying sentencing factors, and there is no change in sentencing factors in the appellate court.

Even if this court re-examines the sentencing factors and other factors of sentencing that are set forth in the sentencing guidelines for the crime of opening gambling spaces, the amount of the original sentence cannot be deemed unfair because it is inappropriate.

3. The defendant's appeal as to the collection of additional charges in the judgment below is with merit.

Pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the part on additional collection among the judgment below shall be reversed (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do10034, Feb. 14, 2008, etc.) and Article 10(1) and Article 8(1) of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Concealment of Criminal Proceeds shall be additionally collected from the defendant pursuant to Article 364(1).

The remaining appeal by the defendant is groundless.

Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act is dismissed.