What the decision said is much closer to "or" than "and".

Such linking is, as your quote says, not infringement if it is done without pursuit of financial gain and is done by someone who does not or cannot reasonably know the illegality of the linked material. In other words, they decided that linking to illegally published material is copyright infringement if it was done for commercial purposes or by someone who knew that the linked material was illegally published.

The court also concluded that, if the linking was done for commercial purposes, it must be presumed that the person publishing the links knew that the linked material was illegally published.