Defendant

All appeals filed by A and B and prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A’s 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles with respect to Defendant A: It is unreasonable to collect money under the pretext of incentives from the Defendant for women engaged in sexual traffic.

B) Prosecutor: It is unreasonable to not collect money from the Defendant as the basic salary from the Defendant for women engaged in sexual traffic. 2) The Defendant: The Defendant’s sentence against the Defendant is too unreasonable. B) The Defendant’s prosecutor: the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is too uneasible and unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (unfair form of punishment) 1: The lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is too unreasonable as the Defendant’s punishment is too unreasonable. 2) The prosecutor’s order against the Defendant: the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is too uneasible.

C. The prosecutor (unfair form of punishment) against Defendant C: The sentence imposed by the lower court against the Defendant is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The purpose of collection under Article 25 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging misunderstanding and Arranging Sexual Traffic is to deprive the criminal of unlawful profits and prevent the criminal from possessing them. Thus, only the profit actually reverted to the criminal should be collected (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do6019, Oct. 12, 2007). Meanwhile, even if the expense paid to the criminal to obtain criminal profits was spent from the criminal profits, it is nothing more than the method of consuming criminal profits, and thus, it shall not be deducted from the criminal profits to be collected (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do2171, May 10, 2007). In light of these legal principles, in this case, the amount of collection under the pretext of incentives for the criminal defendant A should be included in the amount of money that the court below has paid to the female who engaged in sexual traffic as incentives for criminal profits, and it does not include the money actually reverted to the criminal defendant under the basic name.