The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The judgment below

In light of the records, it is proper that the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case on the grounds as stated in its reasoning, and there is no error of misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules or misapprehending the legal principles of co-principal

On the other hand, the Supreme Court held that the confiscation or collection under Article 67 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. shall not be aimed at depriving the defendant of benefits through a criminal act, but shall be a disposition with punitive nature, and even if there was no benefit from such criminal act, the court shall order the collection of the equivalent value, and if there are many persons who committed the crime, the court shall order the collection of the equivalent value in full (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do5158, Dec. 28, 2001). The lower court ordering the Defendant to collect the equivalent value in accordance with the above legal doctrine

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the defendant’s punishment is too unreasonable

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