The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant, who is a child or juvenile, mediates the sexual traffic of K, the Defendant does not constitute “business”.

The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles in holding that the defendant's act of arranging sexual traffic was "the act of arranging sexual traffic."

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds that the sentence of unfair sentencing ( imprisonment for three years and six months, order to complete a program to prevent sexual traffic, 40 hours, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of the misapprehension of the legal doctrine as to the assertion of legal principles refers to the continuous repeating of an act mediating sexual traffic. Determination of whether an act constitutes such act ought to be made in accordance with social norms by comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances, i.e., whether the act was repeated, whether the act was conducted, whether the act was conducted, and whether the act was conducted, the purpose and scale of the act, the number and frequency of the act, and the manner of the act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2003Do935, Jun. 13, 2003; 2012Do4390, Jul. 12, 2012). In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant was engaged in the business of arranging sexual traffic.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles alleged by the defendant.

① The Defendant, with no particular occupation or income, proposed to the effect that “The victim K, who was the third grade of a middle school, is obliged to reach an agreement at the time of human being, and is in need of such agreement, long-term imprisonment” to the effect that “I would be able to help money by sexual traffic,” and proposed to the effect that “I would be able to get money by sexual traffic.”

(2) sexual traffic is conducted by the Defendant who disguiseds himself/herself as if he/she was a woman through his/her cellular phone crypt, and talks directly with sexual male.