The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. 1) The lower court determined that the police statement made by J against the lower court was admissible as evidence pursuant to Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act, but there is proof to the extent that there is reasonable doubt as to the fact that it was made under particularly reliable circumstances.

As it cannot be seen, its admissibility is inadmissible.

2) The Defendant did not provide her “Eel” as a place for sexual traffic, and even if H and J had been accommodated in the said telecom for sexual traffic, the Defendant did not know that there was no reported room operator or the proprietor of an entertainment business, nor did he had the intent to arrange sexual traffic nor engaged in the act of arranging sexual traffic for business purposes, since the Defendant had no intention to arrange sexual traffic.

shall not be deemed to exist.

3) Nevertheless, the court below erred by misunderstanding facts or misunderstanding legal principles as to the facts charged of this case.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (two years of the suspended sentence of imprisonment for August, 200, a fine of ten million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the misapprehension of the legal principle or mistake of facts

A. 1) The term “when a statement or preparation is made under particularly reliable circumstances” as referred to in Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act refers to cases where there is little room for false intervention in the preparation of the content of the statement or the protocol or the document concerned, and specific and external circumstances exist to guarantee credibility or voluntariness of the content of the statement (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do9561, Apr. 14, 2006, etc.). Furthermore, in cases where Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that where the whereabouts of a witness are unknown, it is recognized as admissibility of the written statement or the written statement made by the witness, which is written or prepared by the witness, in the event that the location of the witness is unknown, etc., as prescribed by Article 312 or 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act.