The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months.

, however, the defendant.

[Judgment on the Grounds for Appeal] The sentencing of the court below (the sentencing of the defendant A: imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months, confiscation and collection, defendant B: imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year, confiscation and collection) is too unreasonable.

With respect to Defendant A’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing, the instant crime is committed in collusion with Defendant A et al., a pro-friendly defendant B et al. from March 21, 2014 to March 21, 2014

7. Around July 235 occasions in which profits amounting to KRW 4,2270,00 are earned by arranging sexual traffic, taking account of the defendant's participation degree, frequency and duration of arranging sexual traffic, operating earnings, etc., the crime is not good, and the defendant has been punished by a fine of the same kind and has only one time, and is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, considering the fact that the Defendant has no record of crime in addition to the previous conviction of the above fine, the fact that the Defendant recognized a mistake and reflects it, the fact that the Defendant had the time of self-esteem while living in custody near the five months in this case, and all other circumstances that form the conditions for the sentencing specified in this case, the sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable.

Defendant

There are circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as recognizing the defendant's wrong judgment on the argument of unfair sentencing in B.

However, in light of the degree of participation of the defendant, the frequency and duration of the act of arranging sexual traffic, business profits, etc., the crime of this case committed by the defendant in collusion with the above defendant Gap, etc., is not good, and the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 2 months on April 30, 2014 by this court, which became final and conclusive on May 8, 2014, which was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 2 years. Further, the defendant committed the crime of this case again during the trial and continuously committed the crime until the suspended sentence period, and all other circumstances that are the conditions for sentencing specified in this case are considered, the sentencing of the court below is too unreasonable.