The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of eight million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the Defendant continues to operate a massage place despite the fact that he had been punished three times for the violation of the Immigration Control Act; and (b) the period and scale of operating the instant establishment, etc., of the lower court’s judgment is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

2. In full view of all the circumstances, including the Defendant’s character, character and environment, the background and result of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., and the sentencing conditions specified in the records and pleadings, the lower court’s sentence is somewhat unreasonable and unreasonable.

Therefore, the prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing is justified.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed, and it is again decided as follows.

[Discied reasoning of the judgment below] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court is identical to the facts constituting a crime and summary of evidence, and thus, the summary of evidence is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment below. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 369

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts and Articles 87-2 (2) 2, 82 (3), and 33 (2) of the Medical Service Act for the Selection of Punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Prior to the grounds for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, a number of sentencing factors prior to the sentencing order shall be determined as per Disposition.