성매매알선등행위의처벌에관한법률위반(성매매알선등)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 13,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. Ex officio determination: 10,000 won (Nos. 1 through 3) of the money seized in this case is deemed as profit for the crime of arranging the sexual traffic in this case; and 20,000 won should be additionally collected from the amount calculated as profit during the crime period.
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.
2. If so, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.
(On the other hand, the defendant did not submit the grounds of appeal within the due period for submission of the grounds of appeal after filing an appeal, but the judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio, and thus no separate decision to dismiss an appeal is made). The summary of criminal facts and evidence against the defendant recognized by this court is the same as that of the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and thus, they
Application of Statutes
1. Article 19 (2) 1 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic and the Selection of a fine concerning facts constituting an offense;
1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;
1. Article 48 (1) of the Confiscation Business Act, Article 25 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic;
1. Amount of 1,095,000 won ( = 15,000 won plus 73 times the frequency of total sexual traffic which has been specified as the profit earned by arranging sexual traffic once) - 110,000 won (Articles 1 through 3 of the cash certificates seized) = 985,00 won; and
1. The defendant, on the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, led to the confession of the crime of this case.