However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The Defendant is the owner of a sexual traffic business establishment called “C”.

On January 11, 2013, the Defendant, in collusion with D employees of the above “C”, engaged in the act of arranging sexual traffic by arranging sexual traffic by punishing 29,905,00 won per day average of 10 times from November 6, 2012 to January 11, 2013 and punishing 29,905,000 won per day by arranging sexual traffic.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant A’s legal statement

1. Each police officer's interrogation protocol on D, G, H, and F;

1. Police seizure records;

1. Application of control site photographs and investigation reports (business profit specification) Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 19 (2) 1 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic and the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic concerning facts constituting an offense, Article 30 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (including the case where the defendant reflects his fault in depth and the case where the defendant is the first offender);

1. Article 25 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic, Etc. and Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 25 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic;