성매매알선등행위의처벌에관한법률위반(성매매알선등)
The prosecution of this case is dismissed.
1. The summary of the facts charged is a person who operates an entertainment center (hereinafter “instant entertainment center”) on the Gu government B and the 1st underground level.
On March 4, 2017, at around 00:10, the Defendant received 40,000 won from a male guest who found his/her place at the above entertainment shop as the expenses for provision of alcoholic beverages and commercial sex acts, notified 7 times within the above entertainment shop as the expenses for providing alcoholic beverages and commercial sex acts, and arranged commercial sex acts in order to have female employees D, etc. do sexual intercourse with the above male guest.
2. The following facts can be acknowledged according to the evidence on the market.
① In the instant case, the police officer demanded to pretending customers and enter the entertainment shop in the instant case to perform sexual traffic in order to raise control performance.
② The Defendant did not engage in any act of having sexual traffic, etc., or arranging or providing such act at the instant entertainment shop, and was returning to the customers demanding sexual traffic mediation, etc. without responding to the request.
argument is asserted.
No material exists that the main point of this case has been doing business to ordinary customers such as arranging sexual traffic, and police officers did not control the above main point with such information or intelligence. Thus, Defendant 1’s aforementioned assertion cannot be readily rejected.
③ According to the CCTV screen image, police officers E, who are most likely to be customers, find the instant entertainment main points, divided the Defendant into four minutes of talks with the Defendant and left the place outside the place of computation, and again came into the place of entertainment.
In light of the attitude of dividing the talks between the Defendant and the police officer E, and the time of conversation, etc., the Defendant refused the request of the police officer E who requested sexual traffic mediation, etc., but the police officer E must contact the president (referring to the police officer F who was the same) for promotion, so it is difficult for the police officer E to engage in sexual traffic.