The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the legal principles, the Defendant did not set a separate price between the place of the instant crime and the place of sexual traffic, and the amount that the Defendant received is not simply calculated but is not calculated. Therefore, without deducting the amount paid to the sexual traffic women, the Defendant’s total amount of profit 28 million won should be collected.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine that levied only KRW 14 million on the Defendant, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In light of the overall circumstances of the instant case of unreasonable sentencing, the sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment with prison labor for six months, one year of suspended execution, confiscation, and additional collection) is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Article 25 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic provides that the money and goods or other property acquired by a person who has committed a crime of arranging sexual traffic shall be confiscated, and if it cannot be confiscated, the value thereof shall be additionally collected. The above provision aims to deprive the person of unlawful profits caused by the act of arranging sexual traffic in order to eradicate the act of arranging sexual traffic. Thus, it is reasonable to view that the scope of collection is limited to the profits actually acquired by the criminal.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Do2223 Decided May 14, 2009, etc.). According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the defendant operated a marina business in the trade name, from December 20, 2012 to April 10, 2013, and primarily arranged sexual traffic women to engage in sexual traffic, and, as a result, allowed a female sexual traffic to engage in sexual traffic to engage in sexual traffic, only to the customers who do not want sexual traffic, the defendant received a total of KRW 28 million from the customers while engaging in the above business, and did not distinguish between the sexual traffic female and the sexual traffic.