아동ㆍ청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(알선영업행위등)등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for four years and six months) of the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is too unreasonable.
2. The Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes.
There is no assault or intimidation against sexual traffic juveniles.
The defendant committed the crime of this case when he was a juvenile under the age of 19, and now became an adult of the age of 19.
There is no record of criminal punishment against the defendant.
However, the crime of this case was committed by the Defendant and C to collect money from runaways by requiring them to grow up with a word, and the Defendant and C to raise runaways and to take charge of vehicle driving and management of commercial sex acts when moving, and C to three female juveniles (years and ages 14 through 15) from November 2015 to January 2016, thereby inducing and soliciting commercial sex acts, and furthermore, it is very likely that the Defendant alone, while engaging in the business of arranging commercial sex acts, and that it was committed by theft of things such as cellular phone devices such as the victim C, etc. who lived together with the Defendant.
The defendant shared the role of C with the intention of arranging sexual traffic by using home-free juveniles, and the desire of children and juveniles to have sexual intercourse more expanded and productive through information and communication network so that the harm is serious.
Before committing the instant crime, the Defendant was subject to the suspension of indictment for committing a crime using child or juvenile sexual traffic.
In addition, comprehensively taking account of the character and conduct of the defendant, the environment, and all other sentencing conditions shown in the argument in this case, the minimum sentencing period of the applicable sentencing range in the law is three years and six months, and the recommended sentencing range of the sentencing guidelines established by the Supreme Court sentencing committee, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.
3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.