Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who operates a commercial sex trafficking business establishment, called Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seoul.

On March 25, 2014, the Defendant received 1.20,000 won from the male descendants in the name of the above sexual traffic business establishment as a preparation for the harmony, and then divided the profits therefrom, and had sexual traffic DNA (the age of 19) employed by the Defendant do the sexual intercourse with the sexual grandchildren in the above name.

In addition, from November 2013 to March 25, 2014, the Defendant had a female E (the female, 37 years of age, 37 years of age, her native nationality), F (the female, 26 years of age, her native nationality), etc. employed by the Defendant in the same place in the same manner and had him/her perform a sexual intercourse with his/her male descendant in the name of the same manner, and divided the amount of money received from the customers in the name of his/her name against the said female sex trafficking.

Accordingly, the defendant committed commercial sex acts such as arranging commercial sex acts.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of police suspect regarding D;

1. Each statement of E and F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on seizure records and list of seizure;

1. Article 19 (2) 1 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 25 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic, Etc. and Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act do not have the same criminal record against the defendant for the reason of sentencing, and the defendant seems to have no economic difficulty, but to have considerable social harm caused by sexual traffic, and it can be seen that D, which is not 20 years of age due to the defendant, has caused sexual traffic, may also be deemed that the defendant has been engaged in sexual traffic, and the amount of fine determined by the summary order is excessive, considering the period and type of the defendant's business, equity with similar cases