When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On April 4, 2018, the Defendant: (a) promised D (the 14th age) to pay money to D (the 14th age), which was known through the c pharmacy in Gwangju-gu, Gwangju-gu; (b) promised D to move D to alley-ro around the apartment complex in Gwangju-gu, Gwangju-gu; and (c) went off D from D’s back on the back of the Defendant’s car; and (d) offered D to D 10,000 won in return for said movement.

As a result, the defendant was committing the act of purchasing child or juvenile sex.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements made to D;

1. Article 13 (1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, which applies to the relevant criminal facts and the selective punishment;

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 6 of the Criminal Act (Article 55 and Article 55 (1) 6 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing)

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

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

1. The main sentence of Article 21 (2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 56 (1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, which is subject to employment restrictions;

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Fines of 10 million won to 25 million won;

2. Application of the sentencing criteria: The sentencing criteria shall not apply because of the choice of fines.

3. Determination of sentence: A fine of KRW 10 million is highly likely to have a serious adverse effect on the sexual sexual intercourses at the stage of establishing sexual identity and values, and it is necessary to punish them strictly because they encourage them to engage in sexual conduct for money and other valuables.

The crime of this case was committed by the defendant with the act of purchasing the sex of 14 years of age that he came to know through smartphoneing, and the crime is not good, and the defendant was past.