성매매알선등행위의처벌에관한법률위반등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months and a fine not exceeding twenty million won.
The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (a year of imprisonment with prison labor and a fine of KRW 20 million, confiscation of seized articles) is too unreasonable.
2. On February 2016, the Defendant committed the instant crime again despite the fact that he/she was punished by a fine on one occasion for the same type of crime, and the Defendant, from July 2015 to July 14, 2015, leased a place of business equipped with 19 guest rooms, lodging rooms for employees, kitchens, interior rooms, shower rooms, etc., and operated a sexual traffic intermediary business with at least a minimum of 19 female employees in Thailand. The amount of the crime is large and the period of participation in the crime is not short, and the profits acquired during the above business period are deemed not to be considerable (the Defendant did not disclose the number of employees and employees engaged in sexual traffic at the investigation stage, the number of employees engaged in sexual traffic, and matters related to identity and sales, and returned some female employees to Thailand immediately after the crackdown.
The defendant stated that the defendant restricted the appearance of foreign female employees mobilized for the above business or supervised their actions, and that it is not good to commit the crime, such as harming the victim F who attempted to be absent from the business in the process of this process and assaulting the victim F.
However, in the appellate trial, the Defendant’s full recognition of and reflects on the instant crime; the victim’s punishment was not imposed by agreement with the victim F; and the victim’s termination and closure of the lease agreement with the above place of business around April 30, 2018, and thus, the Defendant did not repeat the crime.
In full view of all the reasons for sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case, including the fact that the sentence imposed by the court below is somewhat unreasonable.
Therefore, we accept the above unfair argument of the defendant's sentencing.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is based on its reasoning, and it is again decided as follows.