The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The subject of confiscation and collection stipulated in Article 30 of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act refers to foreign exchange and other means of payment acquired by a criminal through the pertinent act. This purport is to confiscate or collect foreign exchange, etc. acquired by a criminal through a regulatory act under the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act, and the above "acquisition" refers to the time the criminal acquired as a result of the relevant criminal act.

(See Supreme Court Decision 81Do2930 delivered on March 9, 1982, etc.). The lower court determined that domestic means of payment or foreign exchange itself received for money exchange while conducting unregistered foreign exchange business, etc., are not subject to confiscation or collection under the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act, but can be confiscated or collected, and that only the first instance judgment that collected the total sum of Hong Kong dollars received by the Defendant, etc. for money exchange from the Defendant was reversed, and that only 146,792,470 won was collected from the Defendant out of the total sum of Korean currency exchange received from the Defendant for money exchange.

In light of the above legal principles and records, the above measures of the court below are just and acceptable, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to additional collection under the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act, as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.