The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant was aware of the fact with A, B, etc., who left the place of business and frequently entered the place of business, and did not participate in the brokerage business of sexual traffic.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) As to the assertion of mistake of fact, the lower court determined that the Defendant was guilty of the facts charged in full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence adopted and examined by the lower court.

① A meri (in the investigation records No. 49 to 57 of the investigation records) containing a specific plan for the brokerage business of sexual traffic was discovered at the carb in this case, and the above meri was confirmed to be written by A, B, Defendant and F.

In this domain, the plan that A, B, Defendant D, D, and F share their respective specific roles and the respective opinions on their operation are stated.

(2) Although the Defendant had been able to discuss about the future business plan with A, etc. and shared the role, it was found that A failed to move to implement the plan while deciding to organize the business place.

The argument is asserted.

However, it is difficult to accept the defendant's assertion that A has been engaged in sexual traffic intermediary business in the same way in this case without arranging a business place, and as long as B and D participated in the crime, it is difficult to accept the defendant's assertion that sexual traffic intermediary business was conducted without relation to the above meta, as long as A and B were involved in the crime.

(3) The Defendant was arrested at the scene at the time of control, and B was arrested at the time of control, and the Defendant was seated in front of a camera.

In the meantime, during the crime period, the Defendant’s call details in the base country having jurisdiction over the instant establishment at night were confirmed to be many (in the face of No. 176 of the investigation record). (4) The Defendant kept his/her body in the “I” establishment, and at the time of the control, left the clothes.