All of the appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. The crime of this case as to the grounds of appeal is that the defendants established a commercial sex business establishment in the Internet and reported the above advertisement to the defendants, and it is not good to commit the crime of this case to arrange sexual traffic women and sexual intercourses by sending the applicants for sexual purchase who contacted the defendants to the Cheongju-si Office room or officetel (hereinafter referred to as "dypum"). The crime of arranging sexual traffic like the crime of this case is likely to distort the sound sexual consciousness and morality sense of the general public by commercializing the women's sex, which is less than three months, the period for the defendants arranging sexual traffic is less than three months, the defendants Gap has the history of criminal punishment for robbery, and the defendants Eul led the crime of this case, such as the crime of violating the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and the Protection of Victims, etc. (Special Robbery).

However, the defendants are divided into the crime of this case and are against the defendant, there is no record of criminal punishment for the crime of arranging sexual traffic, the defendants seems to have committed the crime of this case due to economic difficulties, the defendants' distribution of leaflets other than advertising a sexual traffic business establishment via the Internet, or employment of other employees, etc. It seems that the defendants did not systematically operate a sexual traffic business establishment; the defendants' participation in the crime of this case is not significant profits from the crime of this case; the defendants Eul took part in the crime of this case at the latest after receiving the proposal of the defendant A; the women-friendly organizations planned to make a marriage with the defendant sought a preference against the defendant A; the defendant Eul sought a preference against the defendant; the defendant Eul lives faithfully while living together with his wife; and the defendant Eul is living in a food delivery business.