All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court against Defendant A (one year of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, observation of protection, and 300 hours of community service) is too uneased and unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (1) The wage that the above Defendant received during the crime period is money and valuables obtained by the instant crime, and thus, should be collected additionally.

2) The sentence of the lower court against the above Defendant (the imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of the execution of two years, the observation of protection, and the community service hours of one hundred hours) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The purpose of collection under Article 25 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts such as the Mediation, etc. of Commercial Sex Acts (Defendant B) is to deprive him of unlawful profits from the act in order to eradicate the act of arranging commercial sex acts, etc. Thus, it is reasonable to deem that the scope of collection is limited to the profits actually acquired by the criminal. However, since the tax, etc. paid by the criminal in the course of engaging in the act of arranging commercial sex acts is only a method of consuming money acquired in return for arranging commercial sex acts or justifying his act, it is not a deduction from the amount of collection (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do1859, Apr. 11, 2013). According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the above defendant's collection is limited to the money and valuables collected from the defendant F, who was employed by F, as the head of the business establishment of the instant commercial sex acts, and thus, it is recognized that the money and valuables collected from F, which is the above money and valuables paid by the defendant.