The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are not the right holder of the game of this case, and there was no profit from the criminal act of this case.

Nevertheless, the court below rendered an additional collection of KRW 97,510,750. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment, additional collection of KRW 97,510,750) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Whether a relevant legal doctrine is subject to forfeiture or collection is not related to the elements of crime, so strict proof is not necessary, but also it is also acknowledged by evidence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Do988, Apr. 7, 2006; 2007Do2451, Jun. 14, 2007). The purpose of collection under Articles 8 through 10 of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment, etc., which are applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 44(3) of the Game Industry Promotion Act, is to deprive of unlawful profits and prevent possession of it. Thus, where several persons jointly obtain profits from crimes under subparagraphs of Article 44(1) of the Act on the Promotion of Game Industry, only the amount distributed, i.e., the profit actually accrued, should be confiscated and collected individually.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do3868, Jul. 10, 2008). B.

The following facts and circumstances can be acknowledged according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the lower court and the lower court on the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles.

(1) In the case of violation of the Game Industry Promotion Act against D and F (U.S. District Court 2014No4675), D and F operate the game of this case as a partner of the game of this case, and as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below, customers are allowed to engage in gambling and other speculative acts using game products or to leave them to do so, and D and F shall receive the benefit of the game of this case as 1:1.