logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.11.24 2017고정973
성매매알선등행위의처벌에관한법률위반(성매매알선등)
Text

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

2. Where the defendant does not pay the above fine.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

D From October 17, 2016 to October 27, 2016, D engaged in sexual traffic brokerage business at “F”, which is a five-story commercial building located in Gwangju Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant business”).

The Defendant is the representative director of G (ju) who is the owner of the fifth floor of the building in Seo-gu, Gwangju (hereinafter “instant building”) where the instant business establishment is located.

The Defendant had operated the instant establishment around August 22, 2016.

Around August 30, 2016, H provided the instant building with the knowledge of the fact that the instant building was provided for sexual traffic as above from October 17, 2016 to October 27, 2016, even though he/she received the notification from the head of the Seo-gu Police Station in Seo-gu, Gwangju, that the instant building was provided for sexual traffic, even though he/she did not terminate the lease agreement with I.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness I and D;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspects of D;

1. Each photograph and written notification, such as a lease agreement, with respect to the details of the detection;

1. Determination as to the assertion of the defendant and his/her defense counsel in the investigation report (the confirmation of the relevant case judgment)

1. The Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the instant building was leased to the lessee I without knowledge of the fact that he was provided for sexual traffic. However, while the process of termination of the said lease contract between I and I was underway, D engaged in sexual traffic intermediary business at the instant establishment.

Therefore, the Defendant did not provide the instant building upon knowing that sexual traffic was provided intentionally.

2. Determination

A. Article 2(1)2 Item (c) of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Acts of Arranging sexual traffic provides that “an act of providing a building with knowledge of the fact that sexual traffic is offered for sexual traffic” constitutes “an act of arranging sexual traffic, etc.” In addition, sexual traffic, which is linked to our society by blocking the supplier of sexual traffic and intermediate vehicle with the supplier of sexual traffic.

arrow