The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The police officer, at the time of committing the instant crime, caused the criminal intent of the Defendant by investigating a vessel.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the charged facts of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The punishment of the lower judgment that was unfair in sentencing (2 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Judgment on the misapprehension of the legal principles

The term "inception" refers to an investigation method in which an investigative agency arrests a criminal by inducing a person who does not have the original criminal intent to commit a crime by means of deception, trick, attack, etc. As such, if a person who has the criminal intent is provided with an opportunity to commit a crime, or is not merely arresting a criminal by means of deception, trick, attack, etc., it shall not be deemed a naval investigation (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do4532, Jul. 26, 2007). In other words, the defendant asserted the same as the above grounds for appeal even in the court below. According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the police officer had the defendant, who does not have the original criminal intent, induced sexual traffic mediation by means of alcohol, trick, etc., against the defendant who does not have the original criminal intent.

Rather, it cannot be seen that it is merely an opportunity to commit a crime against the defendant who already had the criminal intent to arrange sexual traffic, and it cannot be viewed as an illegal naval investigation.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. We examine the judgment of the court below as to the wrongful argument of sentencing, but it is recognized that the defendant has no record of punishment exceeding the fine, and there is no short period of the period of the crime of arranging sexual traffic of this case, there is no change of circumstance that the court below and the punishment are different from that of the court below. In full view of the defendant's age, sex, sex, environment, family relationship, economic situation, background and motive leading to the crime, and all other matters concerning the sentencing as stated in the records and changes of this case, the sentence of the court below shall be deemed appropriate, and thus, the defendant's person shall be