logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2015.04.17 2014노1019
성매매알선등행위의처벌에관한법률위반(성매매알선등)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. In light of the purport of the grounds for appeal, it is reasonable to view that the daily average income is KRW 20,000,000, as the penalty imposed by the lower court (the penalty of KRW 26,950,000,000 for imprisonment for 10 months, 2 years of suspension of execution, 26,950,000) is too unreasonable, and that D has made a statement that it would make profits of KRW 160 to 18,00,000,000

2. Determination:

A. The following facts are the circumstances favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime as a whole; (b) the Defendant committed a violation of the Public Health Act by committing a violation of the Public Health Act; (c) the Defendant has no criminal history except the past record of a suspended sentence of two years on August, 199; (d) the Defendant has endeavored to dispose of the business establishment; and (e) the Defendant has been making efforts to not repeat the crime while maintaining his livelihood, such as obtaining a taxi driver’s license; and (e) the Defendant appears to be faced with an economic difficult situation, such as filing an application for commencing individual rehabilitation procedures.

However, since the crime of arranging sexual traffic committed by the defendant is detrimental to the good customs by commercializing women's sex, it is highly harmful to society. Therefore, it is necessary to strictly punish sexual traffic suppliers and intermediarys in order to block them. It seems that the defendant employed sexual traffic women to arrange sexual traffic through about 15 months and average purchasers of the month are up to 50 persons. Considering the circumstances unfavorable to the defendant, such as the defendant's age, family relation, criminal records, character and conduct, environment, means and methods of committing the crime, the motive and circumstances after the crime, etc., and the result of applying the sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Committee by the Supreme Court, it is unreasonable to the extent that the sentence imposed by the court below should be reversed.

arrow