logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.08.14 2014노1386
성매매알선등행위의처벌에관한법률위반(성매매알선등)등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (a fine of five million won and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant for ex officio judgment.

A. When a criminal trial becomes final and conclusive substantially, it cannot be repeatedly punished for the same crime, and where a public prosecution is instituted against the same case with a final and conclusive judgment, a judgment of acquittal shall be pronounced. Whether the facts charged or the facts charged are identical or not shall be based on the defendant's act and the social facts, and its normative elements shall also be determined by taking into account the normative elements, with the legal functions identical to the facts. The so-called so-called business crime is a single type of collective crime, for which repeated acts of the same kind are naturally expected due to the nature of the elements of the crime. Thus, multiple acts continuously and repeatedly conducted at the same place for a certain period of time are deemed to constitute one crime comprehensively

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Do5665 Decided December 23, 2005, etc.). Meanwhile, in a case where a judgment becomes final and conclusive with respect to a part of a crime related to a single comprehensive crime, the final and conclusive judgment of acquittal should be rendered on the grounds that the final and conclusive judgment of the court of fact has lost the effect of the final and conclusive judgment on the crime previously

B. (See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do1252, May 11, 2006).

According to the records, among the facts charged in the instant case, the summary of the violation of the School Health Act (hereinafter referred to as "the facts charged in this part") is as follows: "Defendants shall operate a sexual traffic business establishment with the trade name "C" on the first floor of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Area, located within 200 meters from the school environmental sanitation and cleanup zone from July 2013 to August 13:30, 2013; and "C" shall be equipped with two smugglings, one waiting room for female employees, one toilet, and a camera.

arrow