logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2013.06.19 2013고단905
성매매알선등행위의처벌에관한법률위반(성매매알선등)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On November 21, 2012, the Defendant, at the Seoul Central District Court, received a summary order of a fine of four million won or more for violating the Act on the Punishment of Arrangement of Commercial Sex Acts, Etc., and finally became final and conclusive on January 8, 2013.

On January 20, 2013, the Defendant opened a sexual traffic business establishment under the trade name of “C” with goods related to sexual traffic, such as bed, in Seoul Mapo-gu Officetel 1403 and 1504, and advertised sexual traffic to “D”, a website related to sexual traffic, and “E”, etc.

On February 20, 2013, around 13:00, the Defendant provided guidance to F, a customer who reported and contacted with sexual traffic advertisements posted on the “E”, the above website, as the head of the relevant officetel 1504, allowing G, a female employee, to have sexual intercourse twice and received 280,000 won under the name of the agent.

Accordingly, from January 20, 2013 to February 20, 2013, the Defendant arranged commercial sex acts by allowing unspecified customers to engage in commercial sex acts with said G and other employees.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of each police suspect against F and G;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Previous records: Application of criminal records, etc. and other Acts and subordinate statutes;

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

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act does not change the nature of the crime by repeating again even though the defendant had already been punished for the same kind of crime, but there is no other record of crime, confessions and reflects in depth of the crime, and considering the scale and period of the business of arranging the sexual traffic in this case, the degree of profit, and other defendant's age, career, family environment, degree of reflectability, etc.

arrow