All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The following punishments against the Defendants in the lower court’s summary of the grounds for appeal are deemed to be too unhued and unreasonable.

① Defendant A: 2 years of probation, 120 hours of community service order, confiscation, additional collection 1,3820,000 won in the period of imprisonment for eight months; 2 years of probation; 120 hours of community service order; 3 months of confiscation; Defendant C: fine of three million won;

2. Determination

A. Defendant A and Defendants (hereinafter “Defendant A”) invested funds, and run the instant sexual traffic business for at least 40 days when they registered as business operators. Such circumstances are disadvantageous to Defendant A and B.

However, considering the favorable circumstances such as the confession of the crime of this case and the voluntary closure of the business of this case, the defendant A was the first offender who has no criminal history, and the defendant B was not guilty beyond the same criminal record or fine, the defendants' age, sexual conduct, occupation and environment, motive and circumstance leading to the crime of this case, and all other factors of sentencing as indicated in the records and changes theory, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the court below's punishment is too uneasible and it is deemed unfair. Thus, the prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

B. Defendant C’s involvement in the operation of the instant sexual traffic business in collusion with Defendant A and B is disadvantageous.

However, in light of the favorable circumstances, such as the confession of the instant crime and the violation of his mistake, the degree of participation is minor compared to A and B as the head of the instant sexual traffic business establishment; the primary offender who has no criminal record; the Defendant’s age, sex, occupation and environment; the motive and circumstance leading to the instant crime; and all other factors of sentencing as indicated in the records and theories of changes, such as the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unfair. Thus, the prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the Prosecutor’s appeal against the Defendants is all filed.