The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for eight months and by imprisonment for five months.

Seized No. 1.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal asserts that the punishment of the court below (the defendant A: the imprisonment of 10 months and the confiscation, the imprisonment of 6 months and the confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine the part of the judgment of the court below on its ex officio determination.

Articles, etc. provided or intended to be provided for a criminal act may be confiscated if they do not belong to any person other than the criminal or a person other than the criminal knowingly acquires them after the crime was committed.

(Article 48(1) of the Criminal Act. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, since the evidence Nos. 1 through 4 and 7 through 11 of the seized evidence is recognized as being the evidence owned or possessed by Defendant A, and the evidence Nos. 5 and 6 of the seized evidence should be confiscated from the owner or possessor of the article seized pursuant to the above Articles of the above Act, the court below committed an unlawful confiscation of No. 1 through 4 of the seized evidence from Defendant A and No. 5 through 11 of the seized evidence from Defendant B.

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendants' assertion of unfair sentencing, on the grounds of ex officio reversal. The judgment below is reversed, and the following is again decided upon the pleading.

[Discied Judgment] Facts constituting an offense and summary of evidence recognized by the court, and summary of evidence are as stated in the corresponding column of the judgment below.

(Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act). Application of law

1. Article 45 of the relevant Act on the Promotion of Game Industry, Articles 45 subparagraph 4 and 32 (1) 2 of the Act on the Selection of Criminal Crimes, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

2. In light of the fact that the crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 48(1) of the Criminal Act, for instance, is likely to cause harm to the public’s sound sense of work by promoting speculative spirit, and that the Defendants were punished several times for the same crime.