Defendant

The appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment for six months, suspended sentence one year, community service order 40 hours, additional collection 40,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination is reasonable in light of the following: (a) the Defendant’s mistake is against himself/herself; (b) there is no record of criminal punishment other than once a fine; (c) the period of the crime is a short term, business profit is not significant; and (d) the Defendant brought up his/her children after divorce; and (c) it appears that health is not good and that economic circumstances are difficult.

However, the act of arranging sexual traffic is an unfavorable condition, such as the commercialization of women's sex and the harm to the sound sexual culture and good morals. In addition, considering the following factors: Defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the sentencing conditions according to the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court regarding the crime in this case; the range of recommended sentences according to the sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Commission; the sexual traffic crime group of 19 years or older; the sexual traffic crime subject to the age of 19 years or older; the sexual traffic brokerage, etc.; the special form of persons; the decision of the recommended area; the scope of recommended sentences (basic area); and the scope of recommended sentences (6 to 1 year or April); etc., it is not recognized that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

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