logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2016.08.11 2016노57
성매매알선등행위의처벌에관한법률위반(성매매알선등)등
Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding (defendant B) Defendant B merely worked as the head of the business office at the K entertainment shop, and did not arrange sexual traffic in relation to H entertainment shop business.

B. The sentence of the court below (defendant A: a suspended sentence of one year and six months; a community service order of 240 hours; a lecture order of the prevention of sexual traffic for 40 hours; the defendant B: a suspended sentence of ten months; a community service order of 120 hours; a lecture order of the prevention of sexual traffic for 40 hours; the defendant C: a suspended sentence of one year; a suspended sentence of two years; a community service order of 160 hours; and a lecture order of the prevention of sexual traffic for 40 hours; and a lecture order of the prevention of sexual traffic for 160 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, Defendant B had been proven without reasonable doubt that Defendant B arranged sexual traffic in relation to H amusement shop business.

As such, Defendant B’s assertion on this part is without merit.

(1) Each sexual traffic stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment was conducted in the Iel, and is located in the same building as H amusement offer stores and Iel, and K entertainment offer stores are located in the building immediately adjacent to H amusement offer stores.

The operators of the K entertainment shop and H entertainment shop (hereinafter “each entertainment shop of this case”) are Defendant A. Even after each of the entertainment stations of this case was leased to Defendant C, each of the entertainment stations of this case was operated by Defendant A and Defendant C.

On the other hand, Defendant A operated not only each of the instant entertainment centers but also the Iel together, and the 7th floor of the Iel was used as a lodging place for some female employees.

② The female employees of each of the instant entertainment establishments are given instructions from Defendant B, mainly by the female employees of the instant entertainment establishments, who are female employees of the instant entertainment establishments, to enter K entertainment establishments and H entertainment establishments, and to contact customers, depending on the situation at that time.

arrow