beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In fact, the Defendant was present as a witness in the C’s brokerage case of sexual traffic (this Court Decision 2014Da1992, the 1992), and the lower court determined otherwise, despite the absence of perjury, did not err by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (an amount of four million won) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, i.e., (i) G was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on March 21, 2007 by the court on the grounds that it provided the above G with the lease deposit and the internal construction cost of the instant establishment for the purpose of arranging sexual traffic; and (ii) the Defendant was not prosecuted and tried on the ground that it provided the above G with the lease deposit and the inside construction cost of the instant establishment for the purpose of arranging sexual traffic (Provided, That at the time of the Defendant’s offering the above money, G was aware that it would arrange sexual traffic at the instant establishment;
For the reason that it is difficult to see the Defendant was rendered not guilty; ② The Defendant directly arranged sexual traffic at the instant establishment from November 11, 2013 to July 28, 2013; in this regard, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 6 million in this court on July 24, 2014; ③ The Defendant who acquired the instant establishment from the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 2 million in this court on September 11, 2015 due to the criminal fact that C had engaged in arranging sexual traffic at the instant establishment from July 16, 2014 to September 18, 2015; ④ the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 2 million in this court; ④ the Defendant was at the instant establishment at the time of detection of sexual traffic as above, and continued to have access to the said establishment around that time. In light of the fact that C had taken over the instant establishment from the Defendant.