마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)등
Part 1 Crimes No. 1, 2-A, and 2-2 of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance
B. (2) Each part of the crime shall be reversed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant 1) Fact-misunderstanding (the lower court’s judgment) is smaller than Defendant 1’s 1’s co-Defendant AV’s request, but there was no conspiracy or participation in the preliminary crime for the manufacture of phiphonephones as indicated in the first instance judgment, and there was no special intimidation, such as the crime No. 2, in collusion with AV.
Nevertheless, the first instance court found all of the charges guilty on the grounds as stated in its reasoning. The first instance court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2) Each sentence sentenced to the defendant [the first instance court's judgment and the second instance court's judgment) (the second instance court's judgment and the second instance court's judgment) and the second instance's judgment (the first instance court's judgment and the second instance court's judgment) (the second instance court's imprisonment with prison labor for 2 years, the second instance court's judgment: the first, second instance court's judgment; and
B. (2) One year of imprisonment and 2-year of decision for a crime
(b)(1)An administrative fine of one million won for a crime is too unreasonable;
B. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor in the second instance and the first instance court, the prosecutor 1) committed a violation of the Act on the Punishment of Acts, such as brokerage, etc. of sexual traffic (i.e., mediation of sexual traffic, which was acquitted at the court below's second instance judgment) by misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles (i.e., mediation of sexual traffic, etc.) (i., mediation of sexual traffic). (ii) According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor in the second instance and the second instance court, although the defendant conspired with the co-defendant of the second instance court in collusion with the defendant in this part of the facts charged, which led to sufficient recognition of the fact that the defendant arranged commercial sex acts for 65 times and acquired 4.60,00 won in total under the pretext of fees, the second instance court acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged on the grounds as stated
B) According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor in the second instance trial and the second instance trial, the Defendant is found not guilty of the charges in this part of the charges, according to the fact that the violation of the Act on the Registration of Side Business and the Protection of Financial Users.