logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.08.09 2016고정4090
성매매알선등행위의처벌에관한법률위반(성매매알선등)
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 7,000,000, and by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine is imposed against the Defendants.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A, along with D and sexual traffic suppliers, employed foreign sexual traffic women, and recruited to operate a business establishment "commercial sex trading" in the name of "commercial sex trading" in the manner that D will take charge of raising funds and managing sexual traffic women, and the Defendant would take charge of driving vehicles and recruiting male members of sexual traffic, and that the Defendant would take charge of purchasing sex by using a hosting method such as "E", and that the male and female sexual traffic will take place at the apartment in Busan, Busan, and Gyeongnam.

A. According to the above conspiracys in violation of the Act on the Punishment of Acts, Etc. of Arranging Commercial Sex Acts (such as brokerage, etc. of commercial sex acts), the Defendant and D, etc. prepared a lodging house of the female sex trafficking, such as the Officetel F 1406, Busan, Busan, Daegu F F 1406, and let the foreign female, such as "G" and "H, wait at the place." On April 10, 2016, the Defendant and D, etc. decided to purchase the sex through the "E" pattern, to have the female, who decided to purchase the sex through the "E" pattern, receive 130,000 won as the expenses for commercial sex acts, and arrange commercial sex acts from the beginning of April 2016 to the first of the same year, as well as from the act of arranging commercial sex acts by paying 60,000 won among them.

5. Until September 2, 200, foreign women engaged in sexual traffic and 3-4 times a day at Busan and Gyeongnamwon.

Accordingly, the defendant conspireds with D, etc. to arrange sexual traffic for business purposes.

B. A person violating the Immigration Control Act is prohibited from employing a person who does not have the status of stay eligible for job-seeking activities. However, the Defendant, along with D, employed Kazakh, who did not have the status of stay eligible for job-seeking activities on April 2016, as a sexual traffic woman, as described in Article 1-A of the Immigration Control Act.

Accordingly, the defendant has the right to stay in collusion with D, etc. to find a job.

arrow