However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. From November 25, 2012 to November 30, 2012, the Defendant: (a) operated the “D key bank”, which is a business establishment harmful to juveniles, in Busan, Seo-gu; (b) received a proposal from E (n, 17 years of age) and F (n, 17 years of age) to have him/her work; and (c) did not verify his/her age in advance by means of identification card verification, etc.; and (d) employed E from November 25, 2012 to November 30, 2012 to November 30, 2012 to employ him/her as the above kis employee. < Amended by Act No. 11413, Nov. 27, 2012; Act No. 11388, Nov. 30, 2012>

Accordingly, the defendant employed the juvenile in a business establishment harmful to juveniles.

2. On November 25, 2012, from November 30, 2012 to November 30, 2012, the Defendant: (a) received KRW 30,000,000 from the customers who found the said key room; (b) and (c) KRW 70,000,000 per hour from the juveniles E and F employed them, and caused them to have physical contacts, such as customers.

As a result, the defendant had a juvenile engage in sexual contact, such as physical contact, for profit.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The prosecutor's statement concerning the F;

1. Application of the F and E respective Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, and Articles 58 subparagraph 4, 29 (1) of the Juvenile Protection Act (the occupation of employing establishments harmful to juveniles, the choice of imprisonment with labor), and subparagraphs 1 of Article 55 and Article 30 of the Juvenile Protection Act (the occupation of sexual entertainment against juveniles);

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes among concurrent crimes as prescribed in the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (limited to the sum of the long-term punishments of the above two crimes) ;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigations under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act ( considered as favorable circumstances in the rear);

1. Reasons for sentencing (the scope of applicable sentences) under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (refluence to the conditions that are favorable in the future) (Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution (the scope of applicable sentences), from six months to six years (the decision of sentenced sentences), and from six months to six months (the