All appeals by prosecutors, Defendant C, and E are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s punishment against the Defendants by the prosecutor (two years of suspended execution in one year of imprisonment, two years of community service order 200 hours, additional collection 7.9 million won, confiscation, and Defendant B: one year of suspended execution, two years of a community service order 200 hours, additional collection 12.9 million won, Defendant C, and D: 8 months of suspended execution, two years of a community service order 80 hours, additional collection 12.9 million won, Defendant E: 2 years of suspended execution in six months of imprisonment, 40 hours of community service order, and 5 million won of additional collection) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant C and E (1) misunderstanding of facts is merely a fact that Defendant C received a return of KRW 7 million in order to adjust his/her shares, and there is no fact that Defendant C acquired KRW 12.9 million in terms of the proceeds from investment.

Defendant

E is also subject to the return of KRW 14 million in order to adjust his/her shares, but there is no fact that he/she has acquired KRW 5 million in the name of profits from investment funds.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that ordered the collection of additional money equivalent to each amount on the ground that the defendants obtained the above profits is erroneous in the misconception of facts.

(2) The lower court’s respective sentence against the Defendants on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding Defendant C and E’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts, namely, ① A, who distributed earnings in the game of this case, has earned an average of KRW 1.2 million per day for 43 days at an investigative agency, and the total amount of profits is equivalent to KRW 51.6 million.

Defendant

C obtained KRW 12.9 million (=25% of total revenue of KRW 51.6 million) and Defendant E obtained KRW 5 million.

The Defendant stated to the effect that the Plaintiff received shares from Defendant E (Evidence No. 421 of the Evidence Record) and stated that the Plaintiff paid KRW 14 million in his own money, separate from the above profits (Evidence No. 394 of the Evidence No. 394), and that the lower court also stated that the Defendant C had the money.