성매매알선등행위의처벌에관한법률위반(성매매알선등)
The judgment below
Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months.
except that this judgment.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence of the court below (the sentence of one year in prison and a fine of ten million won in prison, the suspended execution of two years, community service, 160 hours, confiscation, additional collection of nine million won, and the fine of five million won in prison: defendant B) is too unreasonable.
2. As long as the money seized in this case (Nos. 4 through 7) is deemed as profits from the crime of arranging the sexual traffic, prior to the judgment on the Defendant’s ground for appeal ex officio against Defendant A, the entire amount shall be collected from the amount calculated as profits during the crime period, with the exception of the total amount above.
Nevertheless, the court below did not deduct the total amount of the above money in determining the amount of the additional collection charge, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding legal principles as to the calculation of the additional collection charge.
3. Determination of the grounds for appeal by Defendant B is favorable for the following reasons: (a) the confession and reflect of the instant crime; (b) there is no record of criminal punishment for the same kind of crime; and (c) there is no record of having been sentenced to a fine exceeding the fine.
However, the act of arranging sexual traffic does not have a significant social hazard, such as harming the sound sexual culture and good morals by commercializing women's sex, and requires a simple and strict punishment to prevent the spread of illegal sexual traffic establishments and to establish a sound sexual culture. In light of the circumstances and contents of the crime in this case, the crime is bad in light of the nature of the crime in this case, and other various sentencing conditions in the records and arguments, such as the defendant's age and behavior environment, circumstances before and after the crime, etc., the sentence against the defendant is too unreasonable.
4. If so, the judgment of the court below on the part against Defendant A constitutes an ex officio reversal as above. Thus, without examining the Defendant A’s assertion of unfair sentencing, Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act is omitted.