This paper measures and sees the economic welfare of the participants(European spice consumer, Southeast Asian spice producer, and European merchant) in spice market and trade and its change in the age of 16~19C. Also, we want to see whether our empirical results fit well with the historical ground which implies unfair trade and economic relationship between Europe and Southeast Asia in this era. We expect this research could provide more objective and concrete evidence for the unfair trade and economic relationship between Europe and Southeast Asia. For this, we divide the era into three periods(first period on 1500~1650, second period on 1650~1780, third period on 1780~1890). It depends on economic distortion and monopolistic power of European merchant on the spice market. We suggest the hypothesis that Southeast Asian spice producer could gain the economic welfare(surplus) at least in the first period. However, as the monopolistic power of European(Dutch) merchant dominated spice market and trade, the economic welfare of producer was lost and transferred to Europe(consumer and merchant) namely, in second and third periods. We assume that the economic distortion and loss of producer`s welfare was maximized at the second period. We propose economic model(demand-supply model) and perform empirical analysis utilizing the price and quantity data of clove and black pepper in the trade. Our empirical results relatively fit well with the suggested hypothesis. Thus, we can say that economic principle that economic welfare should be harmed by economic distortion such as monopoly was even valid in the spice trade between Europe and Southeast Asia in the age of 16~19C. Finally, we believe that this paper contribute in a sense that it could provide the empirical and more concrete evidence which supports the unfair spice trade and economic relationship between Europe and Southeast Asia in the era.