The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The evidence presented by the prosecutor as to the calculation of the surcharge is insufficient to determine the criminal proceeds of the defendant. Thus, the lower court’s calculation of the surcharge is unlawful.

B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendant for the wrongful argument of sentencing (the imprisonment of 6 months, confiscation, additional collection of 58,806,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion that the calculation of an additional collection charge is illegal: It does not require strict certification (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 91Do3346, Jun. 22, 1993; 2015Do1233, Apr. 23, 2015). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the amount remaining after deducting the amount of money exchanged to the game users from the sales amount to the game users, the amount of money exchanged to the game users to the "E" is an amount obtained by deducting 10% of the fee again from the amount of the 10.m. card acquired by the users, and the amount of money exchanged to the above 10.m. 1.m. 4m. 1m. 2m. 1m. 2m. 3m. 5m. 1m. on the date of examination of suspect suspect 3m. x 9m. 1m. 4m. (see, e.g., evidence of the above head 1m. 5m.