beta
Text
The judgment below
The part against the defendant shall be reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.
The defendant above.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant, by mistake of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, was an employee of the parking management of the building where the instant business establishment was located at the request of Co-Defendant A of the lower court, who had been informed of his personal phone at night when the police was seen to have engaged in parking management at night, and there was no act of arranging sexual traffic in collusion with Co-Defendant A of the lower judgment
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (2 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.
2. In the trial of the trial of the court, the judgment of the court of the court of first instance is no longer maintained in this respect, since the ex officio judgment prosecutor applied for changes in the indictment that changed the name of the defendant as stated in the facts charged, and the applicable provisions of this Act to the defendant's crime "aided and abetting a violation of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic, Etc.", Article 19 (1) 1 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic, and Article 32 (1) of the Criminal Act.
3. The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, without omitting the determination of the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the part of the judgment below against the defendant is reversed, and it is again decided as follows.
The criminal facts and the summary of the evidence acknowledged by this court are the criminal facts of the judgment of the court below, and the part against the defendant in the criminal facts of the judgment of the court below, such as "the defendant shall receive KRW 1 million per month from A and shall inform the defendant in advance at the time of regulating the police of the parking management of the customer who found the above business place," thereby facilitating A's above acts of arranging sexual traffic." The summary of the evidence is the same as the statement of the judgment of the court below except for adding "A's statement of a witness at the trial" in the summary of the evidence. Thus, it is true in accordance with Article 369 of the