All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the respective punishment of the lower court (one year and two months of imprisonment, and one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The facts that the Defendants recognized the instant crime and opposed to it, and that Defendant A did not have any record of punishment exceeding the fine are favorable circumstances.

However, each of the crimes of this case is detrimental to the sound sexual culture and good morals and is of great social harm; the Defendants’ act of arranging sexual traffic against many and unspecified persons using the Internet with high spreading level; Defendant A’s act of arranging sexual traffic; Defendant A’s act of arranging sexual traffic; Defendant A’s act of arranging sexual traffic; and Defendant B’s act of arranging sexual traffic is relatively low in size of business duration

It is difficult to see the business period in a short period, and it is difficult to see that Defendant A has a record of being punished by a fine for the same kind of crime, and Defendant B has a record of being punished by a fine and a suspended execution.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendants’ age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence, there is no special change in circumstances that may otherwise determine the sentencing conditions and punishment different from the original judgment, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the Defendants’ appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the Defendants’ appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.