2. The act of arranging sexual traffic does not have a significant social hazard, such as harming the sound sexual culture and good morals by commercializing women's sex, and requires a good and serious punishment to prevent the spread of illegal sexual traffic establishments and to establish a sound sexual culture, and the Defendant repeatedly committed the instant crime at the same place where he/she was sentenced to a fine for the same kind of crime.

On the other hand, however, the court below seems to have determined punishment by fully considering the circumstances unfavorable to the defendant, and it seems that there was no change in circumstances that could change the situation between the court below and the punishment, the defendant's time to commit the crime in this case and misleads the defendant, the period of the crime in this case is one month and not less than one month, and the defendant has no criminal power, except for the punishment sentenced once as above, and other various sentencing conditions in the records and arguments, such as the defendant's age and happiness environment, the circumstances before and after the crime, etc., are considered to be too unjustifiable and unfair.

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