An unreasonable sentencing: The sentence of the lower court (an offence No. 1 of the Decision 2016Gohap240: Imprisonment with prison labor for six months, suspension of execution for two years, the remainder of the crimes in the Decision 2016Gohap240, and the crimes in the Decision 2016Gohap152: Imprisonment with prison labor for four years) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

A. The circumstances cited by the lower court (in the case of a crime of arranging and soliciting commercial sex acts, the Defendant: (a) solicited the juvenile under the age of 13 to live in money through commercial sex acts; (b) assisted the juvenile to purchase the sex of the juvenile for a period of up to nine months; and (c) recommended the juvenile to become the partner in the act of purchasing the sex of the juvenile. The Defendant, while driving a vehicle not covered by mandatory insurance with a license, caused the victim AG to suffer an injury requiring two-day medical treatment; (d) destroyed the vehicle; and (e) instigated the passenger to escape after making a false statement as if he/she paid a traffic accident on behalf of the Defendant. In particular, in the case of a crime of arranging and soliciting commercial sex acts for business purposes, the Defendant did not have any adverse effect on the establishment of the correct sexual identity and values of the Justice who is still under the age of 13; and (e) did not have any negative impact on the Defendant’s sexual traffic crime and the Defendant did not have any adverse impact on the Defendant’s sexual traffic accident during the period.

In light of the contents and period of the instant crime, the criminal records and environment of the Defendant, etc., it is deemed that the Defendant is highly weak in the norm consciousness and is relatively high in the risk of recidivism.

B. The court below held.