Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person operating a “D” house.

On March 6, 2015, the Defendant: (a) registered and operated a business in the name of husband F in the name of “D” in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Gwanak-gu; (b) on July 8, 2015, when the Defendant received a demand from an unspecified male grandchild who found the said female to have a sexual traffic female, he/she provided the said male grandchild with KRW 50,000 for a sexual traffic price and provided guidance to the guest room; and (c) assisted the sexual traffic, such as arranging the said male grandchild to engage in the sexual traffic.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Written statements (A, G);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to documentary evidence, business registration certificate, and business report certificate;

1. Article 19 (1) 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. The defendant and his defense counsel's assertion on the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order, asserts that since the control police officer's visit and crackdowns on the defendant who had no criminal intent by pretending the customers by inducing them to commit a crime constitutes a type of crime investigation into the crime's intent, it constitutes an illegal act and thus, the procedure for instituting the prosecution of this case constitutes invalid in violation of the provisions of law, and the evidence collected as a result of such illegal investigation cannot be admitted as evidence by the rules of law of exclusion from illegally collected evidence.

According to the records of this case, it is necessary to obtain a intelligence that conducts sexual traffic in the instantn, and the control police officer came to be the customer, and the Defendant, who was in the carn, did not demand to leave sexual traffic women, but did not demand to do so, 50,000 won to the police officer and 302 won, and 50,000 won to the soflish and 80,000 won.

the police officer’s “Is Is amba, Is amba,”

A. The police officer paid KRW 50,000, which is called “50,000, including A.C. expenses.”