The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

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

except that this judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below that rendered a collection of KRW 3,1850,000,000, even though the defendant did not have received a profit from the crime of this case, is improper.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds that the sentence of unfair sentencing (limited to eight months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Whether the subject matter of confiscation or collection is subject to confiscation or collection, and the recognition of the amount of collection is not related to the constituent elements of a crime, and it is not necessary to prove strict facts, but it is also acknowledged by evidence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Do9858, Apr. 7, 2006; 2007Do2451, Jun. 14, 2007). In addition, the expenses paid by the offender to obtain criminal proceeds in addition to the criminal proceeds, even if they have been disbursed from the criminal proceeds, they cannot be deducted from the criminal proceeds because they are merely the method of consuming the criminal proceeds.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Do7146 Decided June 29, 2006). According to the account books and photographs (Evidence No. 30,31 pages) attached to a report on internal investigation (comprehensive) it is recognized that the Defendant received profits of KRW 3,258,00 by operating the game of this case around December 2013.

However, the defendant's protocol of interrogation of the police suspect and protocol of interrogation of the prosecutor's interrogation of the defendant is merely a content that the defendant received 10-200,000 won or 10-30,000 won per day while operating the game of this case from September 10, 2013 to December 10, 2013, and it does not make a statement on the basis of data such as books, so it is insufficient to make a statement on the basis of calculation of the amount of additional collection, and there is no other evidence to calculate

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which collected 3,1850,00 won exceeding the above 3,258,00 won based on the defendant's statement on the basis of the defendant's abstract statement is erroneous in matters of law by misunderstanding facts as to collection of additional dues

3. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal is reasonable, and the decision on the argument of unfair sentencing is made.