beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. On December 2004, the Defendant loaned KRW 30 million to C, but did not receive interest from time, and thus, the Defendant promised to have his female sit in company with male customers of the D cafeteria operated by the Defendant and put in company with the male customers, and that if he had sexual intercourse with his customers, he would pay KRW 10,000,000 received from his customers for the interest of the Defendant’s debt.
1. On June 201, 201, the Defendant was issued KRW 100,00 from F under the pretext of preparing against the weather, by having male customers F, who had C in a cafeteria at the D cafeteria operated by the Defendant at the D cafeteria-si, the date of June 201, to enter the cafeteria, and make drinking by drinking with F, who are in the cafeteria.
2. On November 201, 201, the Defendant received KRW 100,00 from G for the purpose of preparing against harmony while allowing male customers G to sit in with C at a restaurant at the same place as that of the first order of November 201, and provide drinking by drinking.
Accordingly, the defendant arranged sexual traffic more than twice.
2. Determination
A. In a criminal trial, the burden of proof for the facts constituting an offense prosecuted is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction should be based on the evidence of probative value that makes the judge feel true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.
B. In the instant case, the Defendant consistently denied the facts charged that there is no fact that the investigative agency had arranged sexual traffic from the perspective of this law to the point of view, and the evidence that corresponds to the facts charged is only a statement and legal statement in each investigative agency of C, G, and F, and in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the records of the instant case, it is difficult to believe each of the above statements as it is. The evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is difficult to view that the facts charged are proven to the extent that the reasonable doubt is excluded
(1) The defendant.