The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the sales amount of marina business operated by the defendant during the business period indicated in the facts charged of this case is 39,966,00 won and the sales amount is included not only in brokerage of commercial sex acts but also in normal business, the court below ordered the collection of 67,20,000 won based on the statement made by the defendant to the investigation agency, and there is an error in the calculation of the collection charge of the judgment below.

2. Determination

A. The purpose of the collection under Article 25 of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Acts of Arranging sexual traffic is to deprive a woman engaged in sexual traffic of unlawful profits in order to eradicate such acts such as arranging sexual traffic. Thus, it is reasonable to deem that the scope of collection is limited to the amount actually acquired by the offender. The scope of collection is limited to the amount actually acquired in case where the actor has paid part of the amount he has received from the customer, such as arranging sexual traffic, and the building rents, taxes, etc. paid in the course of engaging in the act such as arranging sexual traffic is merely K of the method of consuming the money and valuables acquired in return for the act such as arranging sexual traffic. (See Supreme Court Decision 2008Do1392, Jun. 26, 2008, etc.). Thus, it is not necessary to prove whether the act is subject to confiscation or collection or recognition of the amount of collection, etc., which is not related to the elements of crime, and it is not necessary to legally recognize sexual traffic profits based on evidence.