The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Judgment of mistake of facts H

Although the Defendant did not participate at all in relation to the introduction into the main place, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and thereby convicted the Defendant of the facts charged.

B. M&D misunderstanding of the legal doctrine, the Defendant required H

Even if the defendant introduced the job placement service as a main agent, it cannot be deemed that the defendant continued to provide the job placement service continuously and repeatedly.

C. The lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable and unfair.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the summary of the instant case by the Defendant’s proposal and instruction

It can be sufficiently recognized that the introduction to the main place is made.

The defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

① At an investigative agency, A made a statement to the effect that “The Defendant introduced A to work in a singing room and proposed to offer H to the money received in the name of advance payment, and the Defendant respondeded B as a surety in order to receive advance payment.” B, C, and I, accompanied to A and B, stated to the effect that “B, as the proposal of the Defendant, moved H to the Ba.”

② H Abstract of this case

In line with the main point, the male-friendly S of the defendant prepared a written statement stating that "the defendant has been living together, by giving contact information to him that he was living together, and by drinking H." and submitted it to the police.

③ While the Defendant acknowledged the instant criminal facts from the police to the court of the court below, and argued that he/she made a false confession to reverse his/her crime, such as male-child job offering S, etc., but in light of the statements made by the persons involved in the instant case, the Defendant’s above assertion is acceptable.