All appeals filed by a prosecutor, Defendant B, C, and D are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The prosecutor (as to Defendant A)’s sentence imposed by the lower court on Defendant A (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, 80 hours of community service order, 40 hours of lecture for the prevention of sexual traffic, and 31.60,00 won of additional collection) is too unfasible and unfair.

B. Defendant B, C, and D’s sentence (Defendant B and D’s each fine of KRW 5 million, Defendant C: fine of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The instant crime of this case with regard to the prosecutor’s unfair argument of sentencing against Defendant A is a significant crime in light of the following facts: (a) Defendant A introduced a female entertainment loan from April 2012 to December 2014; (b) provided a fee-free job placement service by receiving a referral fee; (c) in collusion with Defendant B, C, and D operated an entertainment store; and (d) provided a male customer with a sexual traffic with entertainment receptionist; and (c) in light of the relevant criminal law, details, period, profits, etc., and (d) the fact that Defendant A started the instant fee placement service for the instant case during the suspension period of execution due to the crime, such as violation of the Act on the Stabilization of Employees’ Status, it is necessary to strictly punish Defendant A.

However, there are extenuating circumstances to consider Defendant A in favor of the Defendant A, such as the confession of the instant crime and the mistake against Defendant A, the fact that Defendant A was punished as the commission of the instant crime, the fact that Defendant A appears to be engaged in another occupation, and that Defendant A is currently engaged in the said other occupation. In light of all the sentencing conditions specified in the instant argument, such as Defendant A’s age, sex, family environment, etc., the lower court’s sentence against Defendant A is too unreasonable.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is not accepted.

B. Defendant B, C, and D’s determination on the unfair argument of sentencing of Defendant B, C, and D are against the mistake in the confession of the instant crime, and Defendant B and D are the same crimes.