However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On March 15, 2016, the Defendant: (a) opened “F”, a child or youth, as the title “W”, at the luxal lux on the luxal site, set up “F” as a child or youth, and (b) opened in G and Seoul Special Metropolitan City H apartment.

On March 16, 2016, around 00:25, the Defendant issued KRW 130,00 to G on the front floor of the H apartment entrance in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, and delivered KRW 130,00 to G on condition of sexual intercourse with G.

As a result, the defendant was committing the act of purchasing child or juvenile sex.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness G;

1. Entry into the protocol of seizure;

1. The Defendant asserts that he was unaware of the fact that G was under 19 years of age at the time of the purchase of the instant pictures [the Defendant]. However, according to the witness G’s testimony, the Defendant asked the age of 21 years when G was on board the Defendant’s vehicle or the Defendant’s vehicle, but the Defendant asked 21 years of age, but appears to be a minor. Nevertheless, the Defendant, without stopping his sexual purchase attempt, moved to the 3rd floor above H apartment underground and paid 130,000 won of G’s chest to G to the 130,000 won, and was exposed to the police control. However, considering that G was not at the time of the purchase of the instant pictures, even if he was found to have established a conversation on “F bulletin” under the name of “I (20 years of age),” the Defendant appears to have been aware of the age of G at the time of the purchase of the instant pictures with G witness’s testimony and the Defendant’s physical development at the time of this case’s age (16 years of age and physical development).