The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding, misunderstanding of the legal doctrine 1) At the time of the instant case, the police officer, pretending to be a customer, demanding the Defendant to leave sexual traffic women and sexual traffic women on the ground of Drouts operated by the Defendant (hereinafter “nicks”). Although the Defendant refused to do so, the Defendant continued to demand and eventually led to the sexual traffic women.

This constitutes a type of crime-incrimination, and thus, the prosecution procedure of this case constitutes invalid in violation of the provisions of the law, and evidence collected as a result of such unlawful investigation cannot be admitted as evidence in accordance with the rules of exclusion of illegally collected evidence.

2) The Defendant: (a) linked a police officer who has no intention to engage in sexual traffic to a female in sexual traffic; and (b) thus, (c) was not possible

It is an impossible attempt to arrange sexual traffic (or an impossible crime).

3) The defendant called to a female sexual traffic to enter the room where the police officer in charge of the control of such female sexual traffic, but the controlling police officer immediately arrested the female sexual traffic G, and the actual sexual traffic did not occur.

Since sexual traffic has not been conducted, it does not constitute sexual traffic mediation.

B. The punishment of the lower court is heavy.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances, comprehensively taking account of the evidence examined by the lower court that constituted a type of naval investigation that may cause a criminal intent, the Defendant deemed to have arranged sexual traffic against a police officer who was the most likely to be a customer among the persons having criminal intent from the beginning.

It is difficult to view that the investigation method by the police officer at the time of the instant case constitutes a type of crime investigation.

(1) A police officer in charge of crackdownd him/her shall obtain an intelligence that conducts sexual traffic in the instant inn, and entered the instantn to make it most of his/her customers.

② The Defendant was operating the instantns from March 7, 2015 to the police.