The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The misapprehension of the legal principle provides that a foreign exchange shall be collected in cases where it is impossible to confiscate foreign exchange. Thus, if it is interpreted that it is not included in the transfer of foreign exchange to another subject of collection, it would result in an improper consequence that makes it impossible to recover criminal proceeds from the unregistered foreign exchange business. Therefore, the court below omitted the collection of equivalent to KRW 16,403,266,778, which corresponds to the foreign exchange acquired by the defendant.

B. The sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (7 million won of a fine) imposed by the lower court is excessively uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles, confiscation, such as whether it is subject to forfeiture or recognition of the amount of additional collection, etc., the reason for additional collection is not related to the facts constituting the crime, and thus, strict proof is not necessary, but should also

In addition, the object of confiscation and collection under Article 30 of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act refers to foreign exchange and other means of payment acquired by the offender through the pertinent act, which is the purpose of confiscation or collection when there is foreign exchange, etc. acquired by the offender due to the act regulated by the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act, and the above "acquisition" refers to the time when the crime was acquired as a result of the pertinent act

(See Supreme Court Decision 81Do2930 delivered on March 9, 1982, etc.). Therefore, domestic payment means or foreign exchange itself delivered on exchange in the course of conducting unregistered foreign exchange business is not subject to confiscation under the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act. However, it should be deemed that only the amount equivalent to commission that the Defendant received constitutes foreign exchange.

However, according to the records, 16,403,266,778 won, which the prosecutor tried to collect the penalty in this case, was temporarily acquired by the defendant to provide a unregistered foreign exchange business, and remitted to a third party.