A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

Although the Defendant did not commit any act of purchasing child or juvenile sex, on January 2017, the Defendant 10,000 won and 130,000 won in cash at his/her own house located in Ansan-si C and 202, and had him/her enter into a single sexual relationship with the said E at the same place as a policeman on February 2017, by making him/her enter into a single sexual relationship with KRW 120,00 or KRW 130,00,000,000 for KRW 120 or KRW 130,000 for KRW 1,00 to the said E at the same place as a policeman on February 2017.

Accordingly, the defendant purchased the sex of children and juveniles three times in total.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. E written statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on text pictures;

1. Article 13 (1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse and the choice of punishment for the crime, and the selection of punishment for imprisonment;

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the same Act [Aggravation of concurrent crimes with the punishment prescribed for the crimes of violating the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (referring to the purchase of sex, etc.) committed on February 2, 2017 with the largest penalty];

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following circumstances considered in favor of the reasons for sentencing);

1. Determination on the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 21(2) main sentence of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse

1. The summary of the assertion was the fact that the defendant purchased gender, but the other party to the sexual purchase was not aware of the fact that E was a juvenile.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by this court, the Defendant was aware that at least the counter-party E to the purchase of dubio Ma was a juvenile.

Since it is sufficient to recognize the defendant's assertion, it shall not be accepted.

A. The Defendant dialogueed with E through “D”, which was first a smartphone display case, with respect to the instant sexual traffic.