The judgment below

Among them, the part of confiscation and collection against Defendant B shall be reversed.

12 cellular phones seized (No. 9.)

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B 1) The sentence sentenced by the lower court (one year of imprisonment, confiscation, additional collection of KRW 245,160,000) is too unreasonable.

2) Of the seized articles that have been forfeited by misapprehending the legal principles, one set of white cell phone (No. 6) and one set of white Am (No. 52) (No. 55) cannot be confiscated because they are irrelevant to the instant crime. The amount of the foregoing additionally collected amount was calculated based only on the profits earned by the Defendant around July 2015, and the amount of the money distributed to the accomplices and the amount seized has not been deducted.

B. The punishment sentenced by the court below (Defendant E: 10 months of imprisonment, Defendant F: 8 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination on Defendant B’s assertion of sentencing 1) There are extenuating circumstances such as the fact that Defendant B recognized the instant crime and reflected in the judgment on the unjust argument of sentencing.

However, during the suspension period of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor, Defendant B engaged in the act of arranging sexual traffic again during the period of the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor, and the crime of this case is deemed unfair because the Defendant obtained considerable benefits by the act of arranging sexual traffic for a long time, and considering various sentencing conditions, such as Defendant B’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the punishment imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

2) The lower court, as to the allegation of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, forfeited each of the above articles on the ground that (1) Defendant B provided or attempted to provide one mobile phone (Aphone 6) with the white phone (No. 52) seized by Defendant B, one with a white fluor (No. 52), and one with a white fluor (No. 55) for the instant criminal act (Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act) or Defendant B acquired each of the above articles in the instant criminal act (Article 25 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts, Etc. of Arrangement of Commercial Sex Acts).

The above articles are the criminal act of this case only with the evidence submitted.