Facts
[X.] had good contacts in Yugoslavia and accommodated around 30 women, mainly from Yugoslavia and Eastern Europe, who worked as prostitutes in saunas and nightclubs, in 1995 and 1996. [X.] found them jobs, drove and accompanied them. He received the proceeds of their work and paid them a portion of it. He also had sexual relations with several of the women he was caring for. The business came to a halt when [X.] was arrested on October 2, 1996 at the Austrian-Hungarian border with two women in the trunk of his car. Additionally, the [A. AG] , of which [X.] was the sole proprietor, leased a car from the [B. AG] / Bank [C.] , which [X.] continued to use even after leaving the company, without returning it.Considerations
The Federal Court upheld [X.] 's conviction for promotion of prostitution under Art. 195 para. 3 SCC. The court concluded that [X.] had a decisive position of power over the women he was caring for and restricted their freedom of action through his overall conduct. The accounts showed that [X.] was profit-oriented and focused on control. The prostitutes had to hand over their earnings to him, and he retained a significant portion of them. The sexual acts with several residents were also considered paid services, with which the women tried to save more of their earnings. Furthermore, [X.] attempted to develop a "menu" of the services and prices to be offered, and to create a file with the…