성매매알선등행위의처벌에관한법률위반(성매매알선등)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The lower court, based on the premise that an amount equivalent to a half of the total amount of 103,695,047 won, which is the total amount of sales by credit cards, is the sales amount caused by sexual traffic, was calculated, but is unlawful as it was not based on objective data.
B. Prosecutor 1) Since 110,000 won received in compensation for sexual traffic from customers in consideration of the misapprehension of the legal principle as to the additional collection amount, 47,134,12 won, which corresponds to 5/11 of the total sales amount of credit card sales amount of 10,000 won, should be collected additionally. 2) The sentence of the lower court on unreasonable sentencing (fine 3 million won) is too uneasible and unreasonable.
2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine as to the additional collection by the Defendant and the prosecutor, the fact that the credit card sales generated in the course of operating D during the business period from December 23, 2013 to June 11, 2015 is up to 103,695,047 won, and G, who worked as the head at the instant resort, stated in the lower court that the percentage of customers who want to come to know among the customers, was about 5:5,00,000 won, and that the number of customers who want to come to know among the customers who want to come to come to know at the instant resort was about 5:5,00,000 won, if the customers of the instant resort pay sexual traffic expenses in cash, but if they pay by credit card, 1.30,000 won, which constitutes commission, tax, etc., and 60,000 won, which is recognized
On the other hand, since the cost of tax, etc. paid by the offender in the course of performing the act of arranging sexual traffic is only a method to consume the money and goods acquired in return for the act of arranging sexual traffic or to justify his/her act, it shall not be deducted from
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do2223, May 14, 2009). Therefore, in full view of the above facts of recognition and legal principles, the Defendant is the instant case.