The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

35,820,00 won from the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, and additional collection) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) In other words, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or misunderstanding the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, by misapprehending the legal doctrine, that 498,70,000 won deposited in cash in the Defendant’s individual passbook over 319 times from October 5, 2012 to July 1, 2015 was purely deposited in the Defendant’s individual passbook. In so doing, deeming the criminal proceeds derived from the crime of arranging the instant commercial sex acts to be the criminal proceeds, and thereby additionally collecting only 335,820,000 won from the Defendant.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. As to the prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding the facts or misapprehension of the legal principles, in principle, where several persons jointly engaged in an act such as arranging or arranging sexual traffic, the value of the profits actually earned by each accomplice should be collected individually, but if the individual gain amount cannot be known, the total amount of profits should be equally divided and collected (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do1392, Jun. 26, 2008, etc.). In the court of the court below, the Defendant, along with the partner F who is an accomplice, was 671,640,00 won, the criminal proceeds acquired from the crime of arranging sexual traffic in this case with the partner F, who is an accomplice, was 671,640,00 won. The evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone alone, that the Defendant

In short, so long as the amount of individual benefits of the defendant and F cannot be known, the decision of the court below that additionally collected 335,820,000 won (=criminal revenue of 671,640,000 x 50% of the defendant's equity ratio) from the defendant is just, and the prosecutor's misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles is not accepted.

B. As to each of the unfair arguments of sentencing by Defendant and prosecutor, the act of arranging sexual traffic does not have a significant social harm, such as impairing the sound sexual culture and good customs by commercializing women’s sex.