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

[2014 Highest 944] The Defendant employed the Defendant’s commercial sex business establishment in Ansan-si from May 13, 2014 to May 13, 2014, the Defendant arranged commercial sex acts by arranging sexual intercourse with F and sexual intercourse with D by receiving KRW 130,00,00 from male grandchildren who found the said business establishment under the pretext of sexual sex trafficking. Of them, the Defendant received KRW 90,000 from F, a male grandchildren who had found the said business establishment, and by arranging sexual intercourse with D, from May 12, 2014 to May 13, 2014, he/she received KRW 130,00 in consideration of sexual sex trafficking, and had them do sexual intercourse with D, thereby arranging commercial sex acts.

[2014 Highest 1376] On June 30, 2014, the Defendant arranged commercial sex acts for business purposes by having a man’s hand, who was a male grandchild, equipped with a ctel 1502, a ctel 1502, and a shower and shower facilities, and having found there, receive 140,000 won as the price for commercial sex acts from G, which was a female employee, to have the female employee do sexual intercourse with G.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police suspect interrogation protocol of D, F, H, and G;

1. Each protocol of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on site photographs;

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

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc. of Social Service Orders;

1. Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act to be confiscated;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 48(1)2 and (2) of the Criminal Act, Article 25 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic, Etc. is found to be the fact that the defendant has mediated sexual traffic for business purposes around May, 2014, and then the defendant is also punished by engaging in the act of arranging sexual traffic for business purposes around June 2014.