All appeals filed by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

The judgment below

Part IV of the relevant Article of the crime is recorded.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal asserts that the defendants' punishment (for defendant A, 1 year and 6 months of imprisonment, 3 years of probation, 80 hours of community service, 70,050 won of a surcharge, 50 million won of a fine, 33 million won of a surcharge) of the judgment of the court below is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor is too uneasible and unfair.

2. In light of the following facts: (a) the Defendants reflect in depth during the period of pre-trial detention up to six months, and Defendant A did not have the same criminal records but has no criminal records; and (b) Defendant B did not have the same criminal records; and (c) the instant crime committed is not directly arranging sexual traffic but leases the buildings provided for sexual traffic; (b) the nature of the crime is minor; and (c) the Defendants’ occupation, age, and all other matters regarding the sentencing specified in the records and arguments are considered appropriate; (d) the Defendants’ respective punishments of the lower judgment against the Defendants are determined to be appropriate, and thus, the Defendants and the Prosecutor’s assertion are without merit.

3. According to the conclusion, the appeal filed by the Defendants and the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and Article 18(3)3 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic, and Article 30 of the Criminal Act is clearly erroneous entry of “Article 19(2)1 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic, Etc. and Article 30 of the Criminal Act,” and it is so corrected.