The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The evidence by which the Defendant, misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, can find out the proceeds of the crime of this case, is limited to the statement at the police and the prosecution of the Defendant, and even according to the statement of the Defendant, the proceeds of the crime of this case committed by the Defendant cannot be specified.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, on the premise that the criminal proceeds of the defendant are KRW 300 million or KRW 400 million.

B. The sentencing of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment, confiscation, and collection KRW 300 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. (1) Determination on the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine (1) The property acquired by a person subject to punishment pursuant to Article 47 Subparag. 2 of the National Sports Promotion Act through similar acts shall be subject to collection in accordance with Article 51(1) and (3) of the National Sports Promotion Act. In a case where several persons jointly engage in similar acts and gain profits, the amount distributed, i.e., the profit actually accrued shall be additionally collected.

Meanwhile, inasmuch as the cost spent by an offender to obtain criminal proceeds is only a method of consuming criminal proceeds even if it was spent from criminal proceeds, it shall not be deducted from criminal proceeds to be collected (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Do7146, Jun. 29, 2006; 2008Do1312, Jun. 26, 2008). (2) According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the following facts are acknowledged.