2. The facts that the Defendants led to the confession of and reflect on the instant crime are favorable to the general public. However, the acts of arranging sexual traffic do not have a significant social hazard, such as harming the sound sexual culture and good morals by commercializing women's sex, and it is necessary to punish the illegal sexual traffic establishment in light of the circumstances and contents of the instant crime, and the method of committing the crime, which are not good, and it seems that the period of the instant crime is short, and that there seems to be little profits earned by the Defendant A are not enough. Defendant A committed the instant crime during the suspension period of execution after being sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on February 14, 2012 on the grounds of the crime of violating the Act on the Punishment of Arrangement of Commercial Sex Acts, Etc. of Commercial Sex Acts (the Act on the Punishment of Commercial Sex Acts, Etc.), Defendant B committed the instant crime during the suspension period of execution, and Defendant B did not appear to have been subject to the punishment of fine on the crime of violating the Juvenile Protection Act, Defendant B did not appear to have been subject to the criminal punishment of each case.

3. As such, the Defendants’ appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since all of the appeals are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.