logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2017.07.20 2017노472
성매매알선등행위의처벌에관한법률위반(성매매알선등)등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that most of the revenues earned by the Defendant from the operation of the massage practice place is spent by public charges, such as monthly rent of buildings, employees’ benefits, cost of purchasing goods or office fixtures, and electricity and water supply. Therefore, the net revenues actually earned by the Defendant are much less than the collected amount calculated by the lower court.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that imposed the amount of additional collection exceeding the actual net income of the defendant is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles in the calculation of additional collection

2. The purpose of collection under Article 25 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic is to deprive the offender of unlawful profits from the act in order to eradicate the act of arranging sexual traffic, etc. Thus, it is reasonable to deem that the scope of collection is limited to the profits actually acquired by the offender. However, since the tax, etc. paid by the offender in the course of engaging in the act of arranging sexual traffic is only one of the ways to consume the money and valuables acquired in return for arranging sexual traffic or to justify his/her act, the collection shall not be deducted from the amount of collection (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do1392, Jun. 26, 2008, etc.). Therefore, it is proper to calculate the amount of collection by the court below that did not deduct the expenses required for the operation of the massage clinic other than the portion paid to the female and the massage employed during the business period, and contrary to the defendant's assertion, it is not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles on the punishment of the act of arranging sexual traffic, etc.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow