1. The part of the judgment of the court below against the defendant A is reversed.

The defendant shall be sentenced to three years of imprisonment.

1. On June 12, 2015, the lower court dismissed the public prosecution against Defendant C on the ground that the public prosecution was revoked regarding the receipt of a total of KRW 17,00,000,00 for three occasions, such as N, etc. Nos. 466 through 468 of the List of Crimes, attached to the lower judgment, in collusion with the participants in the phishing criminal organization, among the instant facts charged against Defendant C.

Therefore, since the prosecutor did not appeal against the dismissed part of the prosecution, the dismissed part of the prosecution was determined separately as it is and excluded from the scope of the judgment of the court.

2. Summary of reasons for appeal;

A. Defendant A or D’s assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles as to the collection of additional charges by the prosecutor is an organization of a criminal organization for telecommunications financing fraud (the so-called “scaming crime”; hereinafter “scaming crime”), and money received under the pretext of salary, etc. is subject to additional charges pursuant to Articles 8(1) and 10(1) of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Concealment of Criminal Proceeds (hereinafter “Regulation on Concealment of Criminal Proceeds”).

Despite such fact, the lower court did not additionally collect the amount equivalent to the pertinent criminal proceeds from Defendant A and D by misapprehending the legal doctrine on additional collection.

B. Defendant A, D, E, and prosecutor’s argument that the lower court’s punishment against the Defendants was too excessive and unfair. The prosecutor asserts that the lower court’s punishment against the whole Defendants is too unfasible and unfair. The prosecutor asserts that the lower court’s punishment is too unfasible and unfair.

3. Determination as to the misapprehension of the legal doctrine of the prosecutor related to collection

A. According to Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Regulation on Regulation of Concealment of Criminal Proceeds, [Attachment Table] subparag. 1-A, 2-A, 8(1), and 10(1) of the Act, a crime under Article 114 of the Criminal Act constitutes a serious crime under the Act on Regulation of Concealment of Criminal Proceeds, and a crime under Article 114 of the Criminal Act cannot be forfeited if the property generated by a criminal act corresponding to a serious crime or the criminal proceeds, which are the property acquired by the said criminal act, cannot be forfeited.