The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

In relation to the sexual purchase under paragraph (1) of the judgment of the grounds for appeal, the defendant did not promise the victim, who is a child or juvenile, to give 10,000 won in return for sexual traffic, or delivered 2-30,000 won in cash. However, in relation to the sexual purchase under paragraphs (1) and (2) of the judgment, the defendant paid sexual intercourses with the victim twice in relation to the sexual purchase under paragraphs (1) and (2). However, although there was a fact that he/she provided sexual intercourses with the victim two times in relation to the sexual purchase, he/she is the defendant, who is a male, bears the transfer

Ultimately, the Defendant’s act of deceiving the victim or having a sexual intercourse does not constitute “the act of purchasing child or juvenile sex.”

In addition, the victim "I wish to go out of home with the permission of the natural parents, but they are residing in the native house." The defendant showed that "The monthly salary is 1,700,000 won by becoming the sales clerks of department stores," and that he did not incur any burden on purchasing low post-ex-post drugs, so the defendant was aware that the victim was her age and 17 years of age, and that the victim was her age and her age was 17 years of age, and the defendant was under the influence of drinking each time the defendant was under the influence of drinking, so the defendant was able to be subject to the sexual intercourse against the victim. In the second second second, the defendant expressed his intention that "I want to come up continuously with the victim's child and child behavior after the victim's economic situation and the defendant's awareness about the age of the victim and sexual intercourse."

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below convicting the facts charged of this case is erroneous.

Judgment

The evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below.