All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the court below is too unreasonable (a year of imprisonment; a year of imprisonment with prison labor; a year of suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for Defendant C; a year of suspended sentence of imprisonment for 8 months; and a period of community service work for 120 hours).

2. The fact that the defendants are all aware of the crimes and reflects the crimes, and that the defendants C did not have the same criminal record is favorable.

However, in light of the fact that the act of arranging sexual traffic has a lot of social harm, such as the commercialization of women's sex and the harm to the sound sexual culture and good morals, and the size of the business establishment operated by the defendants and the business period, etc., the liability for the crime is not somewhat weak. In particular, the defendant A continued to engage in the business of arranging sexual traffic even after being investigated and tried for the same kind of crime, there is no change of circumstances that may be considered newly after the decision of the court below, and there is no change of circumstances that may be considered newly in the sentencing after the decision of the court below, and other circumstances that are the conditions for the sentencing in this case, such as the age, sex behavior, environment, family relationship, etc.

Therefore, we cannot accept the defendants' above argument of sentencing.

3. In conclusion, the Defendants’ appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the Defendants’ appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.