Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

B is a person who operates "D's main amusement store" on the first floor of the Council city C, the underground level, and the defendant is the head of "D's main amusement store".

Although anyone is not allowed to arrange sexual traffic, the defendant, in collusion with B on February 14, 2017, arranged sexual traffic by receiving the price of 4-50,000 won out of 200,000 won per person from the male visiting a guest at an entertainment entertainment shop.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness B;

1. On-site photographs, business permission photographs, and report on police preparation and statement of E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiries, such as criminal history;

1. Article 19 (2) 1 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts, such as Mediation, etc. of elective sexual traffic for facts constituting an offense and Article 19 of the Act on the Punishment of such Acts;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that there was no fact that the defendant had arranged sexual traffic at the time of the instant case while working as the head at the entertainment center of the instant “D” as stated in the facts charged in the instant case.

First, with respect to the admissibility of each simplified statement of F, G, and H, and the police statements made by F, the above evidence was admitted as evidence by the Defendant and the defense counsel, and the authenticity was not acknowledged by F, G, and H. The contents pertaining to the circumstances and general commercial sex acts performed at the “D” entertainment shop in this case. It is unclear as to whether the Defendant had arranged commercial sex acts in collusion with B at the time of the instant case, and it is particularly reliable to the extent that it is not necessary to verify the identity of the original person through cross-examination, etc. in light of the contents of the Defendant’s legal change at the time of the instant case, such as there is no specific statement with regard to the circumstances at that time.