logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.06.24 2015고정591
성매매알선등행위의처벌에관한법률위반(성매매알선등)
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is the business owner who engages in sexual traffic intermediation business in the Gwangju Northern-gu C Studio 204, and E is the female employee who engages in sexual traffic brokerage business in the above business place.

No person shall engage in any sexual intercourse with an unspecified person in part of his/her body, such as sexual intercourse, mouth, etc., or similar sexual intercourse using implements, or become the other party thereto, or arrange or provide a place for sexual traffic, by promising to receive or receive money, valuables or other property benefits from an unspecified person.

Nevertheless, around July 27, 2014, the Defendant leased two of the above Cudio room room for the purpose of arranging sexual traffic and employed female employees E.

Around August 26, 2014, the Defendant: (a) placed an advertisement on the website (F) and found it on the website; (b) received 80,000 won from the above studio 204 room; and (c) made E an arrangement for commercial sex acts, such as, inter alia, stimulateing E to the hands and the mouth of G’s sexual organ.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the police interrogation protocol to E;

1. Article 19 (2) 1 of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. Optional fine;

1. In light of the reasons for sentencing under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act, there is no same criminal history of the defendant, and the defendant seems economically difficult to do so, or the social harm caused by sexual traffic is not a considerable amount of harm caused by sexual traffic, the period and form of the defendant's business, equity in similar cases, etc., it cannot be deemed that the amount of fine prescribed by the summary order is excessive.

arrow