The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the above punishment shall be imposed for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (in six months of imprisonment with prison labor, two years of suspended execution, additional collection 15 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal to amend the bill of indictment was made ex officio, the prosecutor applied for the amendment of the bill of indictment to add "Article 47 subparagraph 2 and Article 26 (1) of the National Sports Promotion Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, and Article 48 (2) and Article 48 (1) of the Criminal Act" to "Article 47 subparagraph 2 and Article 26 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, and Article 48 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act" to the applicable law of the case.

B. We examine ex officio the decision on collection of additional collection.

From June 2014 to November 17, 2014, the prosecutor sought a surcharge of KRW 15 million against the Defendant on the ground that the Defendant received KRW 3 million each month from the end of June, 2014, and operated a private sports climate site with G, etc. (=3 million won per month x 5 months). The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts constituting the crime in its judgment, and applied Article 51(3) and (1) of the National Sports Promotion Act to collect KRW 15 million from the Defendant.

Pursuant to Article 51(3) of the National Sports Promotion Act, the purpose of additional collection is to deprive him/her of unlawful profits generated from a crime in violation of Article 47 subparag. 2 of the same Act and prevent him/her from possessing them in order to eradicate such criminal act. Thus, where several persons jointly obtain profits from the above criminal act, the amount of money distributed, i.e., the profits actually accrued, shall be additionally collected. Meanwhile, the expenses incurred by the criminal to obtain such profits are merely a method of consuming such profits, and thus, it is not merely a method of consuming such profits (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do1859, Apr. 11, 2013). The lower court.