The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (amounting to KRW 5,00,000) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. The collection of taxes under Article 25 of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Acts of Arranging sexual traffic is intended to deprive the criminal of unlawful profits from the act in order to eradicate the act of arranging sexual traffic, etc. Therefore, it is reasonable to deem that the scope of collection is limited to the actual profits acquired by the criminal. However, since the tax, etc. paid by the criminal in the course of performing the act of arranging sexual traffic is only one of the ways to consume money and valuables acquired in return for the mediation of sexual traffic or to justify his/her act, it shall not

In addition, in cases where several persons jointly engage in an act, such as arranging sexual traffic, and where it is impossible to confiscate money and other property acquired from such act, the value of actual profits that each accomplice has actually acquired shall be additionally collected (see Supreme Court Decisions 2009Do2223, May 14, 2009; 2014Do7194, Aug. 20, 2014). B. According to the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant gains 10,850,000 won due to the instant crime (=50,000 won brokerage commission x 50,000 won per business day x 31 days business day x 31 days). The facts that the defendant distributed 1,60,000 won out of the above profits to the accomplice B who jointly accused by the court below (see Article 34 of the investigation record).

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which did not collect 9,250,000 won from the defendant (i.e., 10,850,000 won - 1,60,000 won) is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the punishment of the act of sexual traffic brokerage, etc.

(c)

On the other hand, the Defendant asserts that the amount of KRW 3,300,000 paid should be deducted from the amount of additional collection, in order to lease an officetel, which is the place of the instant crime.

However, according to the above legal principle, the above rent shall be collected from the additionally collected amount.