All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (1) The Defendant B, as a singinger, merely sing and singing together with E at the instant singing room upon the request of E, and there was no sexual intercourse. The Defendant also did not arrange sexual traffic. On the contrary, the lower court’s judgment convicting the Defendant A, which erred by misapprehending the facts. 2) The lower court’s punishment (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B, as a singinger, was a singinger, and Defendant B, at the instant singing room upon E’s request, did not have a sexual intercourse with E.

On the contrary, the judgment of the court below which convicted Defendant B is erroneous in the misapprehension of the facts.

2. Judgment on the defendants' assertion of mistake of facts

A. In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of assessing the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance trial, the appellate court shall not reverse the first instance judgment without permission, on the grounds that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance trial is different from the appellate court’s determination, unless there exist special circumstances to deem that the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance was clearly erroneous in light of the content of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, or that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance trial is clearly unreasonable in full view of the evidence examination results produced by the first instance court and the evidence duly examined by the court of first instance until the closing of arguments in the appellate trial (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do14065, Mar. 25, 2010).

Judgment

The court below held that Defendant B is engaged in sexual traffic based on the original testimony, etc. of the witness E in the court below.