The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the court below's punishment (limited to imprisonment for eight months, two years of probation, one hundred and twenty hours of community service, confiscation, and collection) is too unhued and unreasonable;

2. Even after the Defendant’s control over August 29, 2013, the Defendant continued to operate the instant sexual traffic business by January 18, 2014, and the Defendant had been punished twice due to the Defendant’s violation of the Act on the Regulation of Amusement Businesses Affecting Public Morals, etc., or the Defendant’s wrong recognition and reflects the Defendant’s wrong recognition, and the size of the instant sexual traffic business establishment is not large, the Defendant appears to be in the current status of closure, and there is no record of punishment exceeding the fine, and there is no record of punishment exceeding the Defendant for the same crime after March 2003. In full view of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, circumstances of crimes, means, and consequences, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.