The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Cash and business use confiscated by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Of the money deposited in the W Bank account in the name of the Defendant’s wife, the money deposited from the Defendant’s wife (8 million won) is the money borrowed from the Defendant’s mother regardless of the instant crime, and the money paid by the Defendant to female employees (129,438,50 won) is not the profit that the Defendant actually acquired, and all should be excluded from the amount of collection.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, confiscation, additional collection of 260 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination (Judgment of misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to collection)

(a) Money and valuables or other property acquired by a person who commits a crime under Article 19 (2) of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic, Etc. shall be subject to the collection of penalty pursuant to Article 25 of the same Act for such crime;

Since the above additional collection aims to deprive the criminal of unlawful profits and prevent him/her from possessing it, it is reasonable to deem that the scope of such additional collection is limited to the actual acquired profit. However, since the cost incurred by the criminal in the course of committing a criminal act is not only a method to consume the profit gained from the criminal act or to justify his/her act, it is not necessary to deduct the amount

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do4708, Jul. 10, 2014). (B)

The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., the defendant paid a monthly amount of KRW 1.5 million to female employees, while female employees pay a certain amount of money out of the marina price to female employees according to the type of marina that female employees provided to the customers, and ii) the defendant paid half of the cash transaction and card transaction to the investigative agency.