The scope of objects of the crime of prostitution for the purpose of prostitution under Article 288(2) of the Criminal Code

The term "trade" under Article 288(2) of the Criminal Code means the movement of a female under the de facto control of the other party to the transaction in return for the payment of the price. In the event that a female subject to the sale has a mental sense and has the ability to appeal for the protection of the law and order, it is reasonable in light of the empirical rule to view that it is difficult to trade by a third party who is not a person with parental authority or a person with protection and supervision except for the sale for the purpose of overseas transfer.

Article 288 of the Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 4292 Form 7 delivered on March 9, 1971

Defendant

Appellant

Gwangju District Court of the first instance (74 high-scale192)

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

One hundred days from the number of detention days prior to the pronouncement of the original judgment shall be included in the above sentence: Provided, That the execution of the above sentence shall be postponed for two years.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the charge of attempted trade of female shall be acquitted.

The first point of the grounds for appeal of the defendant is that the sentencing of the court below is too inappropriate even if the second point is guilty, the sentencing of the court below is too inappropriate, and the sentencing of the defendant's public defender is too unreasonable. The sentencing of the court below is too unreasonable.

Therefore, if the court below examines the evidence duly examined and adopted as to the violation of the Employment Security Act from among the first point of appeal by the defendant, it is recognized that the defendant provided a fee job placement like the written indictment without the authority, so the judgment of the court below which convicted this point is just and it is not reasonable to discuss that there is a misunderstanding of facts.

If the record reveals that the defendant's original statement in the trial court, the part of the statement in the trial records of the court of first instance, the part of the non-indicted 1 and 2 (each co-defendant 1 omitted), the part of the non-indicted 3 and 4 prepared by the judicial police officer's handling of affairs, and each statement in the non-indicted 3 and 4, the defendant receives 14,000 won per 14,000 won per 5,000 won per 15,000 won per 15,00 won per 15,00 won per 15,00 won per 15,000 won per 1,50 won per 4,000 won per 3,000 won per 1,00,000 won per 15,000 won per 1,000 won per 15,000 won per 1,000 won per 27,000 won per 14,000 won per 17.

However, it is reasonable in light of the empirical rule to view that, with regard to whether so-called "trade of women for the purpose of exploitation and attempted trade" under Article 288 (2) of the Criminal Act constitutes the crime of trade of women for the purpose of exploitation and attempted trade, such trade refers to the movement of women under the actual control of the other party in exchange for consideration. If a female subject to sale is mentally aware of and has the ability to appeal for protection of the law and order, it is difficult to say that trade by a third party who is not a person with parental authority or his protection supervisor, except for the sale and purchase for overseas transfer purposes, can not be conducted, and as seen above, unless there are special circumstances, if such female is 17 years old or older, and it is hard to find that there is no sufficient evidence to find that there is a person's character and there is no defense to believe that the defendant's pre-sale of such female from the prosecutor's office and the prosecutor's office's office's office's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 3.

Therefore, a party member is not required to decide on the grounds for appeal claiming unfair sentencing, and the decision of the court below is reversed under Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act and the decision is again delivered as follows

Criminal facts

The Defendant, without permission from the authorities, in collusion with Nonindicted 5, received a request from six (6) discharged female prisoners of 17 years old age or name in collusion with him to arrange employment;

1. At around 15:00 on September 22, 1974, at the same place, at approximately 15:50,00, three of the above family release women from Non-Indicted 1 (trade name omitted) are received from Non-Indicted 1 for each person from among the above family release women at the drinking house of the non-Indicted 1 (trade name omitted 1 omitted), and at the same place at around 9.25.18:00 on September 18, 1974, two of the above female women are received from the same person per capita at the same time.

2. At around September 26, 1974, around 00, at the same time, one of the above women is to receive 17,000 won from Nonindicted 2 and to be employed for the entertainment loan of each (trade name 1 omitted) and the head of Si/Gun/Gu, and offer job placement services.

The facts of the court below's decision for the examination of evidence

1. A statement consistent with the facts stated in the judgment at the trial of the defendant;

1. Each statement in the trial records of the court below consistent with the facts in the judgment of the defendant, non-indicted 1, 2, etc.

1. Since each protocol of interrogation of the suspect against the defendant, non-indicted 1, 2, etc. prepared by the prosecutor is recognized in full view of each statement consistent with the facts in the judgment, the facts in the judgment are sufficient.

However, since the court below's judgment falls under Article 30 subparagraph 1, Article 10 (1) and Article 30 of the Employment Security Act, and the so-called "the above-mentioned imprisonment" falls under concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to 8 months within the scope of the term of punishment increased by concurrent crimes of Article 38 (1) 2 and Article 50 of the same Act, which are significant in the nature of the crime and the circumstances under Article 38 (1) 1 of the same Act. According to Article 57 of the same Act, 110 days out of the number of detention days prior to the sentence of the court below shall be included in the above punishment, the defendant is a primary and younger juvenile, and it is reasonable to suspend the execution of the above punishment for 2 years under Article 62 of the Criminal Act, considering the circumstances such as the fact that the court below's judgment falls under the category of concurrent crimes under Article 37 of the same Act.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant conspired with Nonindicted 5

1. On September 22, 1974, at around 15:00 on September 22, 1974, three of the above girls and girls are sold to Nonindicted Party 1 each at KRW 15,500 on around 25:18:00 of the same month, respectively, at around September 26, 22:00 of the same year, two of the above girls and girls are sold to Nonindicted Party 1 for the purpose of using six of the releases and six of the ages of 17 for the drilling business. At around September 26, 200 of the same year, at approximately 15:0,00, two of the above girls and girls and girls are sold to Nonindicted Party 2 in Geum-dong (detailed address 2 omitted) located in Geum-dong (detailed address 2 omitted) Special Metropolitan City on September 26, 200.

2. In light of the records on October 5, 1974, at around 06:00 (mutual 1 omitted), the defendant tried to sell non-indicted 3, 4 to non-indicted 1 for each of the 17 years olds 14,500 won for each of the above 17 years olds 17 years olds 17, a female released from Korea, and attempted to sell them to non-indicted 1 for attempted crimes. The defendant received the same money at the same time and place as the above statements, and delivered them to non-indicted 1, 2, etc. at the same time and place as the above statements, and the fact discovered to the police officer was attempted to deliver. However, as stated in the above reasons for reversal judgment, such fact alone cannot be deemed to constitute the crime of female trading and the attempt thereof, and otherwise, the defendant's exhibition should be sentenced to a verdict of innocence, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the defendant's crime of sale of female members constitutes a crime of violation of Article 288 (2) of the Criminal Act.

Judges Park Young-young (Presiding Judge)