A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On March 4, 2018, around 18:02 to 18:31 on the same day, the Defendant specified the time of sexual conduct as 18:50. However, in light of the contents of the relevant criminal facts (former District Court 2018Gohap48) and the summary of evidence (in particular, CCTV image) in the relevant case, the Defendant and sexual intercourse with the Defendant, D, and E appear to have come into the instant telecom and come from around 18:31 on the same day, and thus, the criminal facts are corrected accordingly.

(A) The facts that the Defendant entered into D, E and Mael on the written indictment are recognized, and the facts that the Defendant did not infringe on the Defendant’s right to defense, and ex officio change the facts of the offense). The Defendant provided D and E with 300,000 won for sexual traffic, and each sexual act was committed once.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on witness D and E's respective legal statements;

1. Article 21 (1) of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic and the Selection of Imprisonment with labor concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act ( considered favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing following the suspended sentence);

1. The defendant's assertion and judgment on orders to provide community service and attend lectures under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act

1. The summary of the assertion is consistent with the date and time, place, and space stated in the facts constituting the crime D and E. However, since the Defendant received drinking water containing exempted ingredients, such as strokem, from them, and lost consciousness, there was no act of sexual intercourse with them.

2. Determination

A. Even according to the Defendant’s statement as well as D and E’s statement, which is the other party who had sexual intercourse with the Defendant, the Defendant entered Belho Lake (hereinafter “the instant telecom”) with D and E, and it is clear that the Defendant d and E d d d d d d d d d d d d d f d d d d d d d d d d d d d d

However, the defendant, D, and E are the case.