All appeals filed by prosecutors and defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Prosecutor 1) In relation to the calculation of the additional collection charge (80 million won) ordered by the lower court to the Defendant by misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the additional collection charge shall be included in the calculation of the amount, as it is related to KRW 50 million with the proceeds obtained by the Defendant from “re-rating management of the re-rating of the re-game game machine.”

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which did not calculate the surcharge is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts and the misunderstanding of legal principles as to the calculation of the surcharge.

2) The lower court’s unfair sentencing (two years and four months of imprisonment, additional collection of KRW 80,00) is deemed to be too uneasy and unfair.

B. The lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Whether a prosecutor’s mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, or recognition of the amount of additional collection, etc., are subject to a judgment of additional collection as to the elements of crime, and there is no need for strict proof, but also need to be recognized by evidence (see Supreme Court Decision 2014Do4708, Jul. 10, 2014). In order to impose additional collection, the requirements for remote or additional collection should be related to the facts charged against which the public prosecution was instituted. In a case where the facts charged are not acknowledged, it is impossible for the court to recognize the facts charged for which no public prosecution has been instituted, and to impose additional collection thereon, it is in violation of the principle of disadvantage and disadvantage (see Supreme Court Decision 92Do700, Jul. 28, 1992). According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, evidence related to the calculation of the amount of additional collection to the defendant can be “the investigation report (calculated)” in the case “the calculation of additional collection charges”.

The portion related to double criminal acts is limited to KRW 80 million (=the amount of KRW 50 million related to paragraph 2 of the same criminal facts as stated in the original judgment) and the amount of additional collection is limited to this amount.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below ordering the defendant to collect 80 million won shall be reasonable, and the amount of mistake of facts or collection shall be collected.