A and C KRW 5 million for each fine of KRW 5 million, KRW 10 million for Defendant B, and KRW 2 million for Defendant D.

At around 23:00 on June 26, 2012, Defendants conspired to operate as Defendant B as business owner at the “I” terminal located in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government H, and Defendant C took charge of massage affairs; Defendant A takes charge of massage affairs; Defendant A takes charge of the so-called “batp president” in the police control time after providing business registration and lease; Defendant E and D takes charge of the duties as an employee who takes charge of customer guidance and carter service; and Defendant E and D took charge of the duties as an employee and took charge of customer guidance and carter service; and Defendant E and D took charge of the duties as an employee, thereby having the customerJ perform sexual traffic, having the sexual traffic women K and sexual intercourse and received KRW 200,000,000 from May 15, 2012 to the above temporary date.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police statement of L/M;

1. The suspect examination protocol of K by the prosecution;

1. Application of seizure records and seizure lists, sales slips, on-site photographs and statutes;

1. Article 19 (2) 1 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic, Etc., Article 30 of the Criminal Act and the selection of fines for the crimes;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

1. Defendant A: The reasons for sentencing under Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act: Defendants A, B, and C are all the visually impaired persons, taking into account the fact that all the above Defendants were involved in each of the crimes of this case, but rather, they invested in the business of this case. In particular, in the case of Defendant B, it appears that the above Defendants would inflict damage more than KRW 150 million, and in particular, the period of the crime is relatively short after the opening of the business of this case, and the establishment of this case was under a control of approximately one month and ten days after the opening of the business of this case, and thereafter the business of this case was closed; Defendant A did not have any previous conviction before the crime of this case; Defendant B did not have any past conviction before the crime of this case; Defendant C did not have any past history of having been punished by imprisonment without prison labor or more; Defendant C is the same as the same.