2. Even when considering the fact that the defendant led to the confession of and reflects on the crime of this case, the period of the crime of this case is not long, and the fact that the act of arranging sexual traffic was deemed to have been committed for economic reasons while being set up in the real estate brokerage office to close down the business of this case, the act of arranging sexual traffic is not highly harmful to society, such as making women's sex commercialized and impairing sound sexual culture and good morals. In particular, even though there were two times of suspended sentence for the same crime in the past, and one time of fines, the defendant repeats the act of arranging sexual traffic without any awareness of any other crime (such as his counsel's assertion, two cases of each suspended sentence may have been tried concurrently. However, in light of each criminal fact, considering these facts, it is difficult to find that the defendant was seriously punished for the crime of arranging sexual traffic because of the fact that there is a high risk of recidivism due to the fact that there is no change in the defendant's age, motive, circumstance, and all circumstances following the crime of this case.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.