beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 논산지원 2016.10.04 2016고단213

성매매알선등행위의처벌에관한법률위반(성매매알선등)등

Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months, and imprisonment with prison labor for six months.

However, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is a business owner who operates a marina business with the trade name of "E" located in D 2 stories in Masan-si, and Defendant B is a person who was an employee of the above business.

1. On February 26, 2016, Defendants A employed Defendant B as employees of the above business establishment. Defendant B, despite being aware that the said business establishment is a commercial sex business establishment, knew of the fact that he/she was a commercial sex business establishment, had the said business establishment engage in commercial sex acts by guiding male customers who find the said business from the end of February 2016 to March 17, 2016, by providing them with a 12-160,000 won amount of the price for commercial sex acts, and by allowing them to engage in commercial sex acts by having the F and sexual intercourse with Thailand nationality, and allowing them to engage in commercial sex acts.

2. Defendant A

(a) If a foreigner violating the Immigration Control Act intends to find a job in the Republic of Korea, he/she shall obtain the status of stay eligible for employment activities, as prescribed by Presidential Decree, and no person shall employ any foreigner who has no status of stay

Nevertheless, from March 1, 2016 to March 17, 2016, the Defendant employed three foreigners who are unable to engage in job-seeking activities, such as F of Thailand nationality that entered the Republic of Korea on January 19, 2016 (B-1), G entering the Republic of Korea on January 28, 2016, and H entering the Republic of Korea on February 9, 2016, as female employees and massages for sexual traffic.

B. A person who is not a massage operator in violation of the Medical Service Act may not establish a massage treatment facility or massage place. The Defendant, despite the absence of a qualification as a massage club, did not report the establishment of a massage treatment facility or massage place with the trade name “E” at the time and place specified in paragraph (1), and did not report the establishment of a massage treatment facility to the competent authority, and did so to employ F, who is not qualified as a massage club, as an employee, as an employee, and had the said employee perform the massage treatment facility by having the said employee perform the massage treatment.