logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2020.06.12 2020노830
성매매알선등행위의처벌에관한법률위반등
Text

All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Part 50,000 (No. 1 of this title), seized.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (Article 1: 6 months of imprisonment, confiscation, additional collection of KRW 3,00,000, and Article 2: Imprisonment with prison labor for 4 months) is too unreasonable.

(b)the sentence sentenced by the second instance of the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable;

2. Each appeal case against the judgment of the court below was consolidated in the judgment of the court below ex officio. Each of the offenses against the defendant is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and one punishment should be imposed in accordance with Article 38(1)2 of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the Defendant and the prosecutor’s allegation of unfair sentencing, and it is again decided as follows through pleading.

[Discied reasoning of the judgment] Criminal facts and the summary of evidence against the defendant recognized by the court is identical to the corresponding column of the judgment of the court of first and second instances. Thus, they are cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. The applicable provisions of Article 19(2) of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic, Etc. concerning criminal facts, are written as “paragraph (1).” However, considering the facts charged and evidence, it is obvious that it is a clerical error in the “paragraph (2)”.

Although a prosecutor submitted an application for changes of indictment on February 14, 2019 to the effect that he/she revises “paragraph (2)” as “paragraph (1),” the prosecutor is merely correct the clerical error ex officio without due process of changes of indictment.

Subparagraph 1 (the occupation of the arrangement of commercial sex acts, inclusive), Article 94 subparagraph 9 of the Immigration Control Act, Article 18 (3) of the Immigration Control Act (the occupation of a person who does not have the status of sojourn eligible for employment activities) and the Road Traffic Act.

arrow