아동ㆍ청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(알선영업행위등)등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (four years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. The Defendant shows the attitude to recognize all of the instant crimes and to reflect his mistake.
The crime of this case is a violation of the Act on the Punishment of Acts, such as the Mediation, etc. of Commercial Sex Acts, which became final and conclusive on July 8, 2020 and a simple concurrent relationship after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the punishment should be determined at the same time in consideration of equity in cases where the judgment is to be rendered.
However, the crime of this case is committed in that the defendant set up a key room in an educational environment protection zone where the operation of a harmful business establishment is prohibited, conducts a similar business, and arranges the act of purchasing the sex of children and juveniles, and the proper sex and values of children and juveniles are used as a means of pursuing economic benefits.
Considering that the period of the Defendant’s act of committing the instant business is not shorter than the period of committing the instant crime, and even though the Defendant was under control and became aware that P was a child or juvenile, it is inevitable to severely punish the Defendant, taking into account the fact that P is once again employed and arranging the act of purchasing child or juvenile sex.
In full view of such circumstances as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records of the instant case, including the circumstances after the crime, as well as the situation where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is unreasonable to respect them. As such, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.
Therefore, the defendant's argument cannot be accepted.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so ordered.