All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the course of operating the instant business, the Defendant spent rent, monthly salary for employees, and management expenses. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine that collected KRW 17,00,000 from the Defendant without deducting such expenses, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment and a fine of 5,00,000, and additional collection of 117,000,000 won) is too heavy or too low (the Defendant).

2. Determination:

A. As to the assertion of misapprehension of legal principles, the additional collection under Article 25 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic intends to deprive the offender of unjust enrichment in order to eradicate the acts of arranging sexual traffic, etc. Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the scope of the additional collection is limited to the profits actually acquired by the offender. However, since the expenses, such as taxes, etc. paid by the offender in the course of performing the acts of arranging sexual traffic are only one way to consume the money and valuables acquired in return for the act of arranging sexual traffic or to justify

(2) According to the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do2223, May 14, 2009). According to the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below, the defendant operated the sexual traffic arranging business at least 180 times a month average for about 13 months from April 201 to May 16, 2012 in Nam-gu, Incheon, at least 13 months. The defendant was paid 50,000 won after deducting the money that is divided into the shares of a female sexual traffic among the 1.20,000 to 1.7,00,000 won (=180,000 won x 53 months x 13 months). Furthermore, in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the profits earned by the defendant from the crime of this case are calculated as the defendant's rent for employees, management expenses, etc.