All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) A, an employee of the Defendant, merely provided a loan to the Defendant for the amusement store business, and commercial sex acts were attempted by agreement with the customer without the involvement of the Defendant or A. Thus, A engaged in commercial sex acts as a broker for commercial sex acts.

shall not be deemed to exist.

B) The Defendant did not recognize the above sexual traffic, and the Defendant did not participate in all sexual traffic between the customer and the contact with the customer.

The instructions were given.

Therefore, the Defendant is not negligent in giving due attention and supervision to prevent sexual traffic, and the Defendant does not bear criminal liability under both punishment regulations.

2) The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 3 million) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (unfair sentencing)’s sentence is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Except in exceptional cases where it is deemed remarkably unfair to maintain the first instance judgment as to the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court, the appellate court does not reverse without permission the first instance judgment on the ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court is different from the appellate court's judgment (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do4994, Nov. 24, 2006, etc.). 2) In light of the above legal principles, it is reasonable to find the Defendant guilty in light of the following circumstances revealed by the court below's lawful adoption and examination.

This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

A) Taking into account the following facts, A, an employee of the Defendant, engages in sexual traffic for business purposes as stated in the instant facts charged.