The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (the imprisonment for four months, the suspension of the execution of two years, the community service work for 120 hours, and the order to attend a course for the prevention of sexual traffic and the confiscation of 9,095,00 won for 40 hours, shall be collected additionally) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine the judgment, the fact that the defendant acknowledges and reflects the mistake, and the fact that the first offender is the defendant is favorable to the defendant.

However, considering the fact that the act of arranging sexual traffic has a lot of social harm, such as the commercialization of sex and harm to the sound sexual culture and good morals, and there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the original judgment, as well as the various sentencing conditions shown in the argument of this case and the sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the Sentencing Committee of the Supreme Court, the defendant's above assertion by the court below is without merit since it is too unreasonable that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's above assertion that the charges, advertising expenses, etc. should be deducted from the additionally collected amount. However, the expenses that the defendant spent in the course of engaging in the act, such as arranging sexual traffic, are only a way to consume the money and valuables acquired in return for the mediation of sexual traffic or to justify his act, it is not allowed to deduct them from the additionally collected amount (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Do1859, Apr. 11, 2013). Therefore, the defendant's above argument by the defendant is without merit.