The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding the facts and legal principles, the Defendant paid part of the money acquired in return for the instant commercial sex acts to the female sexual traffic, paid monthly rent, electricity rent, management fee, etc. with the remaining money, and 30% of the actual business day during the period of operation of the instant commercial sex acts establishments. Thus, the profits actually acquired by the Defendant is 4.86 million won. Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the reduction of the amount of 16.7 million won or by misapprehending the legal principles on additional collection, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (two years of suspended sentence, two years of probation, observation of protection, community service 200 hours, additional collection) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the misapprehension of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. The purpose of collection under Article 25 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts such as Arranging the sexual traffic is to deprive the criminal of unlawful profits from the act in order to eradicate the act such as arranging the sexual traffic. Thus, the scope of collection is limited to the profits actually acquired by the criminal.

In cases where an actor, such as brokerage of commercial sex acts, pays part of the amount received from customers to employees of commercial sex acts, the scope of such collection is limited to the profits actually acquired by the offender except for the amount paid to employees of commercial sex acts women, and the expenses paid in the course of performing the act, such as brokerage of commercial sex acts (such as building rents, public charges, various operating expenses, etc.) are merely one of the methods of consuming the money and valuables acquired in return for the act, such as brokerage of commercial sex acts, and does not necessarily be deducted from the amount of collection (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2008Do1392, Jun. 26, 2008; 2014Do10735, Nov. 27, 2014). Whether there is any profit actually acquired and the amount to be collected is the element of the crime itself.