However, as to the Defendants for two years from the date of the final judgment of this case, the Defendants are above.

Defendant

A, around June 26, 2018, leased the 1st underground floor in Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government from the owner D, and thereafter, operated the commercial sex acts establishments with the trade name "E" from around July 10, 2018 to September 21:45, 2018, and installed a guest room equipped with bed and shower facilities, etc. at that place, and employed Defendant B and had them take charge of the management of Defendant B. In managing the said establishments, two female women with the native nationality of Thailand are employed, and Defendant B, while managing the said establishments, had many unspecified male guests who find out the said places of business perform sexual intercourse with those of the said Thailand nationality, and in return, received KRW 6-70,00 per time from customers.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to commit acts such as arranging commercial sex acts.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police interrogation protocol concerning F and G;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. Application of statutes to field photographs (No. 12 No. Serials of Evidence);

1. The Defendants: Article 19(2)1 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, Articles 30 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment with labor

1. Defendants on probation: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Probation and community service order Defendant B: Article 62-2 (1) and (2) of the Criminal Act, the main sentence of Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc.;

1. Defendant A: Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc.;

1. Defendant B: The former part of Article 25 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic;

1. Defendant A: On the other hand, under the latter part of Article 25 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic, a prosecutor seeks to collect a surcharge of KRW 24 million. However, in this case, the subject of collection is profits from "act of arranging sexual traffic" and thus, the amount paid to a sexual traffic woman is not subject to such act. The above amount is the total sales during the crime period, which is paid by the Defendants to the sexual traffic women.