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

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (for defendant A: 10,00 won of imprisonment and fine of 8 million won of fine; 2 years of probation; probation; community service; 120 hours of confiscation; confiscation; 5 million won of fine and fine of 8 months of imprisonment and fine of 5 million won of probation; 2 years of probation; 120 hours of probation and community service) are too unfortunateed and unfair.

2. The acts of arranging sexual traffic do not have a significant social hazard, such as harming the sound sexual culture and good morals by commercializing women's sex, and requires a simple and severe punishment to prevent the proliferation of illegal sexual traffic establishments and to establish a sound sexual culture. Each of the crimes of this case committed by the Defendants are very poor in light of the period, means, methods, and circumstances, etc., the crime committed by the Defendants is committed by the Defendants, Defendant B, while performing the business of arranging sexual traffic with Defendant A, he moved the place to another place and engages in the business of arranging sexual traffic along with Defendant C; Defendant C, while performing the business of arranging sexual traffic at the place of the crime of this case, had a record of regulating the business of arranging sexual traffic at one time and sentenced to a fine of five million won by the police, but has a record of regulating the business of arranging sexual traffic again.

However, in full view of the following facts: (a) Defendants A and B did not have the history of being punished for the same kind of crime; and (b) and other various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments, such as the Defendants’ age and happiness environment; and the circumstances before and after the commission of the crime, the lower court’s sentence against the Defendants is too uneasible and unreasonable.

3. If so, the Prosecutor’s appeal against the Defendants is without merit. Thus, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.