The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant C shall be reversed.

Defendant

C shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10,000,000.

Defendant .

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on collection of KRW 285 million against Defendant A under the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic, Etc., thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (six months of imprisonment, one year of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

(c)

The sentence imposed by the court below against the Defendants of the public prosecutor is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Defendant A’s assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles regarding the punishment of the act of arranging sexual traffic (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do2223, May 14, 2009). Since the collection under Article 25 of the Act on the Punishment of the Act on the Punishment of the Act on the Mediation, etc. of Commercial Sex Acts is intended to deprive the criminal of unlawful profits from the act in order to eradicate the act of arranging sexual traffic, etc., the scope of the collection is reasonable to deem that the criminal is limited to the profits actually acquired. However, in light of the legal principles as to the punishment of the act of arranging sexual traffic and the amount of taxes, etc. paid by the criminal in the course of performing the act of arranging sexual traffic, etc., are only one of the methods of consuming the money and valuables acquired in return for the mediation of sexual traffic or justifying his act, it shall not be deducted from the amount of the collection (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do1392, Jun. 26, 2008).

(1) Defendant A shall be conducted by the prosecution.