A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Punishment of the crime

A person engaged in the lodging business of 2014 Highest 5249 shall be prohibited from engaging in any business that disturbs public morals, such as allowing juveniles to have sexual intercourse accommodation, or providing a place for such business.

Nevertheless, at around 22:00 on April 17, 2014, the Defendant engaged in business conduct that disturbs public morals, such as making juveniles f (n, 14 years of age), G (n, 14 years of age), H (n, 15 years of age), and I mixed with EMoel 401 operated by Defendant D in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City.

Although anyone of the 2014 Highest 6888 was prohibited from engaging in any act that disturbs public morals or providing a place for such purpose, such as allowing a juvenile to have sexual intercourse accommodation, the defendant was engaged in any act that disturbs public morals, such as leading him/her to a sexual intercourse, from March 10, 2014 to around the 15th day of the same month, the defendant was engaged in any act that disturbs public morals, such as leading the juvenile, J (14 years old, female), K (14 years old, female), L (15 years old, female), and M (16 years old, male), a juvenile who found his/her place in Incheon Bupyeong-gu Eel from March 10, 2014 to around the same month.

Summary of Evidence

"2014 Highest 5249"

1. Legal statement of a witness I;

1. A written statement of F, G, and H: "2014 Highest 6888";

1. Application of the witness J and L’s respective legal statements Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 58 subparagraph 5 of the Juvenile Protection Act and Article 30 subparagraph 8 of the same Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Selection of each sentence of imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act among concurrent offenders is that the defendant committed each of the crimes in this case even though he/she had been under suspension of execution with his/her previous department, and it seems that the court denies the crime in this case, and thus, it is not true that it is not against the defendant. The punishment as ordered shall be determined in consideration of various sentencing conditions revealed in this case, such as the defendant's occupation