However, the above sentence shall be executed for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The Defendants in violation of the Act on the Punishment of Arrangement of Commercial Sex Acts, Etc. (the Act on the Punishment of Commercial Sex Acts, Etc.) invested 20 million won as a kind of friendship, thereby Defendant A operating a commercial sex business establishment and conspired to divide the profits therefrom to Defendant B.

Defendant

A is a business owner who has facilities such as six marina rooms and one public shower room in the second floor of the building in Yangsan City, and operated a commercial sex trafficking business establishment in the name of "E", and Defendant B was in charge of management such as guidance of customers at the above marina business establishment if the above A does not work.

From April 16, 2018 to May 31, 2018, the Defendants received 11 to 130,000 won in return for sexual traffic from the male grandchildren who wish to engage in sexual intercourse from the above “E” and had the F, G, etc. of the nationality of Thailand who is a sexual traffic woman do the sexual intercourse with the said male grandchildren.

Accordingly, the Defendants conspired to commit acts such as arranging sexual traffic for business purposes.

2. Where a foreigner in violation of the Immigration Control Act intends to find an employment in the Republic of Korea, he/she shall obtain the status of sojourn eligible for employment activities, as prescribed by Presidential Decree, and no person shall employ a person who has no status of sojourn eligible for employment activities;

Nevertheless, Defendant A operated a “E” sexual traffic business establishment as indicated in the foregoing Paragraph (1) and employed F and G as female employees of the said business establishment until May 31, 2018, with knowledge of the fact that the sex of Thailand’s nationality, which he/she acquired through the advertisement, did not have the status of sojourn eligible for job-seeking activities, and that he/she could not work as visa exemption (B-1) around April 15, 2018.

As a result, the defendant employed a foreigner who does not have the status of sojourn eligible for employment activities.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. A written statement of F and G;

1. The police seizure record and the list of seizure;

1. A complaint prepared by the head of Busan Immigration Office; and