Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 30,000,000.

Defendant .

A. The sentence of the court below (two years of suspended execution for ten months of imprisonment) against Defendant A and the prosecutor (the defendant A) is too heavy or (two years of suspended execution for ten months of imprisonment) is unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (defendant B and C) of the lower court’s respective punishment (two years of suspended sentence in the ten-month imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence in the one-year imprisonment, and two years of suspended sentence in the one-year imprisonment) is too unfluent and unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. We also examine the grounds of appeal on this part of the Defendant and the Prosecutor’s allegation of unfair sentencing against Defendant A.

Although the Defendant, as an adult, has a social responsibility to protect children and juveniles so that they can not become the counter-party to the act of purchasing sex and have a sound sexual morality, the Defendant’s purchase of sex of young juveniles aged between 12 and 13 prior to the formation of a proper perception of sex and the quality of such crime is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, considering the defendant's favorable circumstances, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and various sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime, the punishment imposed by the court below is somewhat unreasonable. It is recognized that the punishment imposed by the court below is unfair, considering the following circumstances: (a) the defendant committed the crime in a timely manner and reflects the truth; (b) the victims and their sexual intercourses were not committed; (c) the victims and their sexual intercourses were working as the deputy head in the workplace; and (d) the elderly parents and the elementary school students are working as the deputy head in the workplace; and (c) the edification in the society that the court below intended to dismiss from the workplace is difficult to expect.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit, and the defendant A's above assertion is with merit.

B. Defendant B and C’s act of purchasing child and juvenile sex as an adult in determining the Prosecutor’s argument (Defendant B and C).