All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A-misunderstanding of the facts, misunderstanding of the legal principles, and misunderstanding of the legal principles, or misunderstanding of the legal principles, the lower court found the facts with respect to the period of the sexual traffic business or the profits from the sexual traffic, and determined the amount excessively collected by misapprehending the legal principles on the collection

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one year and two months of imprisonment, and a fine of KRW 15 million) is excessively unreasonable.

B. Defendant C-misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and misunderstanding of sentencing 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, and the amount paid to G, an accomplice, were included in criminal proceeds owned by the Defendant, thereby making an excessive collection.

2) The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment and a fine of ten million won) is excessively unreasonable in light of the fact that the criminal defendant actively cooperated in the investigation or other circumstances favorable to the criminal defendant.

2. Determination

A. The purpose of the collection is to deprive the criminal of unlawful profits from the act in order to eradicate the act of arranging and arranging sexual traffic. Thus, it is reasonable to deem that the scope of the collection is limited to the profits actually acquired by the criminal. However, in light of the above legal principles, since taxes paid by the criminal in the course of engaging in the act of arranging and arranging sexual traffic or the expenses such as wages paid by the accomplices are only one way to consume the money and valuables acquired in return for the act of arranging sexual traffic or to justify their act, the collection is not allowed (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do223, May 14, 2009, etc.).