A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10,000,00, and by a fine of KRW 5,000,000, respectively.

The Defendants respectively.

1. The Defendants’ co-offenderd with mind to operate a sexual traffic business establishment on September 1 to October 2017, and agreed to invest the amount equivalent to KRW 10 million in Defendant A and KRW 20 million in Defendant B and distribute profits at 50%, respectively. Defendant B placed an advertisement of similarity with the trade name “G” in the name of her spouse E and the Internet advertising site “F” in the name of her spouse E, and Defendant A shared the role of management of the business establishment, including female employees recruitment, customer guidance and reception, cleaning, etc.

From January 19, 2018 to February 24, 2018, Defendants employed H(24) and I(25) female employees from “G” located in the above C building D, and reported “G” advertisements posted to F, an Internet advertising site, and had many unspecified male visitors receive the same amount of KRW 100,00 to KRW 130,00 for once sexual traffic from the said female employees.

As a result, Defendants conspired to act as commercial sex acts such as brokerage.

2. No person who accused A shall induce or induce any third party to purchase sex of a child or youth;

Nevertheless, the Defendant, from November 201 to January 2018, at the front of the house of K (Woo, 17 years old) which is a juvenile under the jurisdiction of Changwon-si, Changwon-si during several times, recommended K to engage in commercial sex acts at the above “G” business, which is the business of causing 10 minutes of the last 10 minutes of the aftermath of the aftermath from Kim Jong-si, and that “the last 10 minutes of the aftermath of the aftermath of the inside Kim Jong-si.” As such, the Defendant: (a) stated that “the late 10 minutes of the aftermath of the aftermath of the inside Kim Jong-si; and (b) made it possible for an unspecified male customer to engage in commercial sex acts, and (c) received approximately 100,000 won or KRW 130,000,000 in return.

Accordingly, the defendant recommended that he be the counterpart to the act of buying sex of juveniles.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ each.