All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendants misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles have assisted the purchase of child or juvenile sex, they cannot be deemed to have engaged in “business” in light of the purpose, period, frequency, etc. of the instant crime.

B. Each sentence (4 years of imprisonment to Defendant A, 3 years and 6 months of imprisonment to Defendant C, 3 years and 3 years of short term) imposed by the lower court on the Defendants are excessively unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) In regard to the assertion of mistake of facts, etc., the term “business” of the relevant legal doctrine means continuing to repeat the same act. Whether the act constitutes this is determined according to the ordinary social norms, comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances, including the repetition and continuity of the act in question, whether the act was conducted, whether the act was conducted, the purpose and scale of the act, the number of times, the period, and the attitudes, without any relation as to whether the act was equipped with human or physical facilities, and if the act was performed with the intent of repeated continuation, the act constitutes a single act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2003Do935, Jun. 13, 2003; 2012Do4390, Jul. 12, 2012).

Therefore, this part of the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

① Defendant A remains approximately 20 days for mediating the conduct of Defendant A to purchase sex of F and L, which is a juvenile, and Defendant C is able to purchase sex of F as a juvenile.