All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Prosecutor 1) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (Defendant A: 2-year suspension of execution, community service, 80 hours, additional collection of 40,650,000 won, Defendant B: 3-year suspension of execution, additional collection of 40,650,00 won in one year of imprisonment, and 40,650,000 won in one year of imprisonment) are too unaffortable, and thus, the additional collection of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic, etc., such as the illegality of the amount of the additional collection charge, is deemed as a punitive collection, and thus, the additional collection of 81,

B. The above punishment sentenced by the court below against the Defendants is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Although there are favorable circumstances such as the Defendants’ understanding of unfair sentencing by their mistake, and there is no criminal record against the Defendants, the Defendants’ closure of a sexual traffic business establishment after the instant crime, Defendant A was detained for a considerable period of time due to the instant crime, Defendant B’s wife and children, etc. However, the instant crime is likely to take illegal gains by using the deposited sex culture of our society, thereby impairing tax justice, and thus undermining criticism. The Defendants interfere with investigation by the Defendants on the ground of the chief executive officer during the investigation process; the Defendants’ period of operation of the illegal sexual traffic business establishment reaches two years; the Defendants’ motive and background leading up to the instant crime; the age, character, and environment of the Defendants; and other various sentencing factors indicated in the records, the Defendants’ punishment imposed by the lower court on the Defendants is too heavy or unreasonable. Thus, the Defendants’ assertion on this part of the instant crime is without merit.

B. The prosecutor’s act of arranging sexual traffic is jointly conducted by several persons who determine the illegality of the amount of the additional collection charge.