A. Each sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants (Defendant A: one year of imprisonment, three years of probation, 240 hours of community service order, confiscation, additional collection, 105,921,50 won, Defendant B: one year of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, three years of community service order, 240 hours of additional collection, 105,921,50 won) are too unreasonable.

B. The above punishment, which the court below decided against the Defendants, is too unhued and unfair.

2. We examine the defendants and the prosecutor's unfair argument of sentencing together with each of the following facts: the defendants recognized the facts charged of this case and reflect their mistakes in depth; the defendant A was the first offender who has no criminal history; the defendant B had no criminal record in excess of the same kind or fine; the defendants were detained in this case and have been living for more than two months; the defendants' act of arranging sexual traffic is not considerably detrimental to society, such as undermining the sound sexual culture and good morals; the defendants engaged in sexual traffic intermediary business for a long time; the profits acquired therefrom are significant; the defendants Gap continued to engage in sexual traffic intermediary business for a long time; and the defendant Gap received suspension of indictment on charges of aiding and abetting sexual traffic; other unfavorable circumstances such as the defendants' age, character, environment, family relationship; and all of the sentencing conditions stated in the records and arguments of this case, such as the records and arguments of this case, are considered, and there is no reason for the court below's assertion that each of the defendants is too heavy or unfair.

3. In conclusion, the appeal by the Defendants and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.