The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the punishment of the original judgment (two months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and eight hours of social service) is too unreasonable;

2. On October 6, 2014, although the defendant recognized the crime of this case and is against the defendant, the defendant continued to operate his business in the same manner following the following day despite the fact that he controlled the act of arranging sexual traffic as a business on the part of October 6, 2014, and re-controled on the following day. In light of the size and method of the crime, such as the lease of four rooms in the officetel building and recruiting female employees through the Internet advertisement, the crime is not less complicated; the defendant has been sentenced to a fine due to the crime of this case; the defendant has been sentenced to a criminal conviction due to the crime of this case; and in full view of all other matters concerning the sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case, including the circumstances leading to the crime of this case, the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after the crime, the defendant'

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.