All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (unfair sentencing)’s punishment (a punishment of imprisonment for eight months, two years of suspended sentence, protection observation, community service order 120 hours, confiscation, and collection) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (misunderstanding of facts) was merely a joint Defendant A’s speech that Defendant B would engage in a sound marina business rather than commercial sex acts and prepared a lease contract on his behalf. However, the lower court found Defendant B guilty of the facts charged in the instant case. In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

2. We examine the determination of Defendant A’s unfair argument of sentencing, and the fact that Defendant A recognized the instant crime and reflects his mistake in depth, and that there was no criminal record for the same kind of offense, etc. are favorable to the Defendant.

However, the crime related to the sexual traffic of this case is a crime that enables the commercialization of a woman's sex and has a high possibility of criticism, and in particular, the defendant is the business owner of a sexual traffic business establishment in light of the background and method of the crime of this case, the scale and facilities of the business establishment of this case, etc., which are disadvantageous to the defendant. In addition, considering all the sentencing conditions of the defendant in the argument of this case, such as the defendant's economic situation, age, sexual conduct, environment, circumstances after the crime, change of circumstances after the sentence of the court below, etc., the punishment of the court below is deemed to be within reasonable and appropriate scope, and it cannot be deemed unfair.

Therefore, Defendant A’s above assertion is without merit.

3. The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly examined at the lower court and the lower court’s judgment regarding Defendant B’s assertion of misunderstanding of the facts, namely, Defendant B, from March 2, 2016, is equipped with 6 room rooms, bathing facilities, etc. installed at the instant business establishment from around March 2, 2016, and CCTV, etc. installed to view the waiting room for female employees and inside and outside of the building, and engages in sexual traffic.