The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant, as stated in the facts charged, conspired with G and does not arrange commercial sex acts for business purposes, the lower court, which deemed the Defendant as a co-principal with regard to the crime of violating the Punishment of Arrangement of Commercial Sex Acts, etc. of G, erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or erroneous determination of facts.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. According to Article 2(1)2 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic concerning misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the term “act of arranging sexual traffic, etc.” includes not only the act of arranging, soliciting, inducing, or compelling sexual traffic, but also the act of providing a place of sexual traffic or providing funds, land, or buildings with knowledge of the fact that sexual traffic was provided for sexual traffic. The following circumstances, which can be revealed by evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., G maintained a long-standing relationship with the defendant, and the defendant and B was aware of the fact that they were regulating sexual traffic in the instant business, and the defendant was even asked whether he would be punished to a certain extent if he was sexual traffic business establishment before moving the instant business establishment. In full view of the following circumstances, the defendant was aware that the sexual traffic business establishment was conducted through several times from December 1, 2013 to May 8, 2014.

However, as G in collusion with B and the defendant's act of arranging sexual traffic and providing a place for sexual traffic constitutes separate crimes of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic, G shall be deemed as a single offense of the crime of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic, respectively. Therefore, the defendant is more than G.