성매매알선등행위의처벌에관한법률위반(성매매광고)등
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.
If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.
Punishment of the crime
No one shall advertise to solicit or induce any act of buying sex.
Nevertheless, from Jun. 2018 to Dec. 19, 2018, the Defendant: (a) from Jun. 2018 to Jun. 2018, 2018, the Defendant posted “G” (G), a mobile phone number for business use in Hosi-si Damoel, Eel, Felel, etc.; and (b) the young female pictures of the selected clothes type printed out on the Maurto’s entrance, or distributed them around the Maur.
Accordingly, the defendant recommended or induced the purchase of sex.
Summary of Evidence
1. Statement by the defendant in court;
1. A report on internal investigation (for the former part of a business trip post), and a report on internal investigation (for the first part of a business trip post),
1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to name cards and photographs;
1. Article 20 (1) 3 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic and the Selection of a fine concerning facts constituting an offense;
1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;
1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;
1. The portion not guilty under Article 48 (1) of the Criminal Act;
1. Around November 7, 2018, the Defendant: (a) received 130,000 won per hour from his/her sexual intercourse from his/her sexual intercourse from his/her sexual intercourse, located in Busan Metropolitan City; (b) around November 7, 2018.
2. Determination
A. The Defendant asserted that, on the premise that sexual traffic is allowed to be purchased upon the fulfillment of the conditions, the Defendant placed an advertisement for sexual traffic under the premise that he/she is allowed to purchase the sex. However, on November 7, 2018, the Defendant did not engage in sexual traffic as above.
B. In a criminal trial, the finding of guilt ought to be based on evidence of probative value, which could lead a judge to feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, even if there is a suspicion of guilt against the defendant, it is inevitable to determine it as the benefit of the defendant.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do7487, Feb. 10, 2006). The defendant is admitted as evidence corresponding to this part of the facts charged.