Facts
The appellant, who lived with a woman who financed herself through prostitution, was not convicted of pimping by the Swiss Federal Supreme Court's Court of Cassation. Although the appellant benefited from his girlfriend's earnings and maintained a somewhat higher standard of living, he could not be accused of reprehensible exploitation of her prostitution. He held a regular job and contributed to the household himself. The court made it clear that not every acceptance of maintenance payments without a legal entitlement should already be considered exploitation within the meaning of Art. 201 para. 1 of the Swiss Criminal Code (StGB). Rather, the perpetrator's conduct must have a significant degree of unlawfulness in order to fulfill the elements of the offense of pimping.Considerations
According to Art. 201 para. 1 StGB, pimping is punishable if someone "exploits" the immoral earnings of a person who engages in commercial sexual acts. The court made it clear that the term "exploitation" is to be understood as a reprehensible acceptance of services. Not every acceptance of maintenance payments without a legal entitlement fulfills this element of the offense.
In the present case, neither subjectively nor objectively could the appellant be accused of exploitation. Although he benefited from his girlfriend's earnings and maintained a somewhat higher standard of living, he held a regular job and contributed to…