Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be paid.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A, in collusion with E, the so-called "D" operated by the similar trading business entity operated under the C of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government as the so-called management office, such as reporting a camera to customers or providing guidance to customers, and in collusion with E, around October 10, 2012, the above business entity found the place and provided 80,000 won as the price for commercial sex acts from the false customers in the name of the name, and provided guidance to the room. In addition, F and G employed by the defendants engaged in a similar act, such as misunderstanding sexual intercourse in the sexual character of customers, by having sexual traffic women, F and H, who are women in commercial sex acts from June 20, 201 to the above time, in return for payment from the customers in the name, and by having them do the similarity act, such as arranging commercial sex acts.

Summary of Evidence

1. The first protocol of trial of this case;

1. Protocol of examination of witnesses regarding E;

1. Each police suspect interrogation protocol of F, H, G, I, and E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police seizure records and list of seizure;

1. Article 19 (2) 1 of the Act on the Punishment of Arrangement of Commercial Sex Acts, Etc. and Article 30 of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense.

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. On August 4, 2012 and the 10th day of the same month, the facts charged against the crime of violating the Act on the Punishment of Arrangement of Commercial Sex Acts, Etc. (sexual traffic) for the reasons of innocence under Article 48(1)2 of the Criminal Act are as follows: (a) the Defendant received 80,000 won as the price for commercial sex acts from an I who was found as a customer and received 80,000 won as the price for commercial sex acts by hand, and (b) had the similarity of sexual intercourse in return for the price for commercial sex acts from I.

The second police interrogation protocol against the defendant, the police interrogation protocol against I, and the I's statement against I do not believe, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Rather, the witness I's testimony, the witness examination protocol against E, and the evidence No. 1 are presented.