The defendant shall be innocent.

1. No person prosecuted in the instant case shall arrange, solicit, induce, or provide a place for sexual traffic, or arrange sexual traffic;

D (Disposition of suspending the prosecution of the prosecutor's office of Suwon District Court on November 30, 2016) was to operate a commercial entertainment business establishment from the end of September 2014 to October 28, 2014. Around October 28, 2014, when the police was controlled, only the head of the city is changed to operate the commercial entertainment business establishment. In preparation for the crackdown, the Defendant recommended the joint operation of the commercial entertainment business establishment to the Defendant, who was known to the usual place, and entered into a contract with the said Etel 1301 in his/her name on March 2016.

In collusion with D, from March 9, 2016 to March 26, 2016, the Defendant: (a) received KRW 130,000 in return for sexual intercourse from male customers, such as F, etc., who reported Internet advertisement, and found in the said officetel; (b) sent sexual intercourse to the said heading room where sexual traffic women, G, H, etc. are waiting; and (c) assisted the sexual traffic women by taking into the said heading room where they were waiting for, and causing them to engage in the similar behavior, under which the sexual traffic women are able to see the gender of male customers by hand; and (d) mediated sexual traffic for business purposes against unspecified customers who find the said place of business.

2. The gist of the defendant's lawsuit is that the defendant merely lent the name of the lessee referred to in Article 1301 of the Etel at the request of D, and there was no consent from D to the joint operation of the sexual traffic business establishment, and there was no act of arranging sexual traffic for business purposes in collusion with D.

3. Determination

A. The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction of guilt is to be based on the evidence of probative value that makes a judge not having reasonable doubt as to whether the facts charged are true. Thus, in the absence of such evidence, even if there is no doubt as to the defendant's guilt, it is against the defendant's interest.