All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable that the sentence of the lower court (an imprisonment of one year, confiscation, and collection of 8 months, confiscation and collection of 770,00 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Defendant A1) It is recognized that the Defendant led to confession and reflects the instant crime, and that there was no criminal record for the same kind of crime.

2) However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the act of arranging sexual traffic is a highly harmful crime, such as the commercialization of women’s sex and undermining the sound sexual culture and good morals; (b) the act of arranging sexual traffic continues to take a place after the first crackdown; (c) the act of arranging sexual traffic has been committed three times consecutively; (d) the act of committing the instant crime during the repeated offense period due to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Larceny); and (e) the Defendant’s age, criminal background, and circumstances after the commission of the instant crime, etc., taking into account the favorable circumstances of the Defendant as seen earlier, even if the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable, it is not deemed unfair.

3) Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. Defendant B (1) is recognized that the Defendant led to a confession and reflects the instant crime, and there is no criminal record for the same kind of crime.

2) However, in full view of various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, background leading up to the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable even if considering the favorable circumstances of the Defendant, which are the conditions for sentencing specified in the instant pleadings, such as the following: (a) the act of arranging sexual traffic was highly harmful to the society, such as making the women’s sex commercialized and impairing the sound sexual culture and good morals; and (b) the Defendant continued to arrange sexual traffic by moving to a place even though it was controlled by the sexual traffic brokerage on June 23, 2015; and (c) the Defendant continued to control the sexual traffic again on July 27, 2015.

3) Accordingly,.