The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the gist of the grounds for appeal, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts that the defendant recommended D to engage in sexual traffic with the customers in the name and non-name of D, but the court below acquitted the defendant.

2. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the ground that ① E was engaged in sexual traffic under the agreement with D in the lower court and stated that the Defendant did not recommend sexual traffic; ② the Defendant was prepared and submitted a confirmation document that the Defendant arranged sexual traffic with D; ② the Defendant stated in the court of the lower court that D was written to agree with D in order to agree with D in the process of sexual traffic; ③ the Defendant was engaged in sexual traffic under the agreement with D in the process of sexual traffic; ③ the F (the person stated in the lower court’s name in its name in its name) was merely engaged in sexual traffic under the agreement with D; ④ the Defendant stated to the effect that there was no entry in the process; ④ there is unclear motive for the Defendant to recommend sexual traffic; and ② E and F did not have any special relationship with the Defendant to make a false statement on behalf of the Defendant.

Examining these judgments of the court below closely by comparing them with records, the judgment of the court below is justified.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.