The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence of the lower court (five years of imprisonment, 80 hours of order to complete a sexual assault treatment program, 5 years of order to restrict employment) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant, in the appellate trial, recognized the instant crime and opposed to the judgment.

The crime of this case shall take into account the equity between the crime of violation of the Act on the Punishment of Arrangement of Commercial Sex Acts, Etc. (sexual traffic) and the crime of concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

The defendant has no record of criminal punishment prior to the crime of this case.

Family members and relatives of the defendant want to take the action against the defendant.

These points are favorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, the crime of this case is very heavy for the defendant to purchase the sex of the victims who are children and juveniles who lack the ability to judge the facts of the crime of this case three times, and to have sexual intercourse with the victim C on the ground of debts.

After committing the instant crime, the Defendant forced the victim C to prepare a false statement.

The defendant denied the crime of this case in the court below, and the victim C has to attend the court of the court below and make a statement again with the experience of damage.

up to the appellate trial, the defendant did not receive a letter from the victims, and did not recover from the damage.

These points are disadvantageous to the defendant.

As above, comprehensively taking account of the sentencing circumstances, including the circumstances favorable to the defendant, and other factors, such as the defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and means of committing the crime, as well as the circumstances after committing the crime, etc., the sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act as stated in the argument and the record, etc., it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable to the extent that it is deemed that the sentence imposed by the defendant was exceeded

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing.