Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

D is an employee of the Finger's shop in Changwon-si Mingdong E, and the defendant is the owner of the said shop.

D around October 17, 2016, around 20:17, around 20:17, a man-made female employee in a name unsatisfying him/her in combination with G to drink with G, and subsequently, he/she received KRW 200,000 from G as the price for sexual traffic, and had him/her enter into a sexual relationship by moving to the nearest room of the said week, but he/she did not have sexual intercourse.

The defendant, who is the employee of the defendant, committed the above violation in relation to the defendant's duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the witness D;

1. A criminal investigation report (verification of such video CDs);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on a petition;

1. Article 27 of the relevant Act and Articles 23 and 19 (1) 1 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic, Etc., concerning facts constituting an offense, and the selection of fines;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The gist of the assertion was that the Defendant, an employee, was unaware of the fact that he/she arranged sexual traffic, and he/she exercised considerable care and supervision over his/her duties in order to prevent the act of arranging sexual traffic.

2. The proviso of Article 27 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts, such as the Mediation, etc. of Commercial Sex Acts, provides that "the same shall not apply where a corporation or an individual has not been negligent in giving due attention and supervision concerning the relevant duties to prevent such violation." This aims at ensuring the invalidation of both punishment regulations by forceing the presumption of negligence even if the corporation or an individual who is the business owner is not liable without fault. In specific cases, whether a corporation or an individual has neglected to exercise due care and supervision in relation to the relevant violation, namely, the legislative purport and punishment provisions of the relevant Act.