The judgment of the court below is reversed.

[Defendant A] The defendant shall be punished by a fine of eight million won.

The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. Defendant C, on November 6, 2019, visited a marina business operated by Defendant A and B on the part of November 6, 2019, and only provided an act of arranging sexual traffic for a day and did not engage in the act of arranging sexual traffic.

Therefore, inasmuch as Defendant C without a status committed a crime in collusion with Defendant A and B, the punishment under Article 19(2)1 of the Act on the Punishment of Arrangement of Commercial Sex Acts, Etc. (hereinafter “the Act”), rather than Article 19(1)1, should be imposed. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on Article 33, etc. of the Criminal Act, which applies Article 19(2)1.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (Defendant A: 2 years of the suspended sentence of June; 3 million won of a fine; 40 hours of a community service order; 40 hours of a community service order; 3 million won of a fine; 10 months of a fine; 3 million won of a fine; 3 million won of a fine; 3 million won of a confiscation; 6 months of a fine); and 3: Defendant C’s imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding Defendant C’s assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, Defendant C was temporarily visiting the marina business establishments operated by Defendant A and B, which were located on November 6, 2019, and then engaging in the act of arranging sexual traffic for a day.

Article 19(2)1 of the Act on the Punishment of Commercial Sex Acts provides that if a person engages in the business of arranging commercial sex acts, etc. and his/her punishment is aggravated, if a defendant C without such status participated in the act of the defendant A or B, who is in a business-based position, he/she shall be punished pursuant to the proviso to Article 33 of the Criminal Act even if the defendant C becomes an accomplice of the crime pursuant to the main sentence of Article 33 of the Criminal Act.

Nevertheless, the lower court against Defendant C is the same as Defendant A and B.