The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for 8 months and collection of 1.8 million won) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination is the circumstances favorable to the defendant that the defendant recognized all of the crimes in this case and reflected, and there are health problems and economic difficulties.

However, the Defendant, who was sentenced to suspended sentence for the same crime, committed the instant crime while in the period of suspended sentence, continued to engage in business in other places despite the first crackdown, and the Defendant, by preparing a lease contract under his/her own name and prohibiting the payment of commercial sex acts, and managing and settling it, paid advertising fees directly to the commercial sex acts advertising site. The Defendant actively participated in the overall operation of the commercial sex acts establishments, such as purchasing equipment for the commercial sex acts or directly paying advertising fees to the commercial sex acts advertising site, meeting for the employment of the commercial sex acts women, or guiding the commercial sex acts to visit the commercial sex acts place and the entrance room by receiving a promise from the male buyer.

(1) The court below held that the defendant, who is a joint defendant A, who is only the chief of the court below, was sentenced to a suspended sentence, is in violation of equity. However, the principal sentence against the defendant is lower than the joint defendant of the court below, and as seen earlier, the defendant's punishment against the defendant is inevitable because the degree of participation is no less than that of the same kind of crime during the suspended sentence period, and as such, it is difficult to see that the punishment against the defendant is in violation of equity. In full view of all the conditions of sentencing specified in the records and arguments of the case, including the above circumstances, including each other, the sentence imposed by the court below is deemed appropriate, and it cannot be said that the defendant exceeded the scope of reasonable discretion.

3. Conclusion, the defendant.